• Please note that we've updated the Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord save file system which requires you to take certain steps in order for your save files to be compatible with e1.7.1 and any later updates. You can find the instructions here.

Recent content by Gondvanaz

  1. Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

    SenorZorros said:
    Gondvanaz said:
    First of all, the gladiators were MAINLY slaves who were fighting for their life. On the other hand, the farmers were fighting for their king. Do you realize the difference and why
    Gladiator >>>> Farmer and why these "Show Duels" >>>>> Battlefield

    In the arena you're all alone (while in the battlefield you've got your fellow soldiers who could save your life), sometimes you're even outnumbered and you fight for your life. That's why the "show duels" in the arena are many times more superior compared to the melees in the battlefield. The arena is a supreme test and you need real skills to survive there. Also the gladiators are trained killers. Don't even compare them to the soldiers.

    This only seconds my point that the people who dual wield are many times superior warriors than the ordinary soldiers.
    with all due respect...
    learn history you idiot.

    gladiators:
    1. were not always slaves
    2. were often spared, it should be obvious considering no one could affort to train one for just two matches.
    3. wore INOPTIMAL GEAR. the romans preferred their gladiators to wear often exotic and never perfect gear. they especially dislkied armour resulting in most gladiators walking around bare-chested. if a gladiator dual wielded they did so because they had to. not because it worked that well.
    1) Are you stupid or act like a such? I SAID MAINLY!!!
    2) I'm not here to discuss history and this thread is not about history, it is about a computer game.
    3) The history is written by writers, people who have never been in a battlefield, not by the warriors themselves. The history books reflect only the one side of the war and you can never be sure it is not a misinformation.
    4) The dual wielding gladiators are the the highest ranked gladiators, you...*%$#
    5) Be careful with the insults, little boy!!! :evil:
  2. Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

    578 said:
    You can already see dual wielding in the combat video on an NPC, why do you still all discuss it? Go to 1:03 of this video and look to the left when the player swings his sword (When it hits the rock, press pause)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYTRsEtqKps
    I don't see any combat.
  3. Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

    Sekij said:
    Thats what we said about Show Duels not used in Battles.
    First of all, the gladiators were mainly slaves who were fighting for their life. On the other hand, the farmers were fighting for their king. Do you realize the difference and why
    Gladiator >>>> Farmer and why these "Show Duels" >>>>> Battlefield

    In the arena you're all alone (while in the battlefield you've got your fellow soldiers who could save your life), sometimes you're even outnumbered and you fight for your life. That's why the "show duels" in the arena are many times more superior compared to the melees in the battlefield. The arena is a supreme test and you need real skills to survive there. Also the gladiators are trained killers. Don't even compare them to the soldiers.

    This only seconds my point that the people who dual wield are many times superior warriors than the ordinary soldiers.
  4. Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

    FrijolitoJR said:
    Gondvanaz said:
    These knowledgeable people who spam with "this is utter nonsense" only because they don't like one's ideas definitely will not gain my respect. At least they should try to say something strong to make my wrong points stand out clearly.
    +1 I know dualwielding makes no sense but it's fun :grin:
    I don't know whether it makes sense or not. But games are supposed to be fun... i don't why the people on this forum are obsessed with this realism/historical accuracy bull****.
    I bought Dark Souls 2 only because of the dual wielding, but i didn't enjoy it at all because of the dragons, monsters, ghosts, skeletons, tortoises, ogres etc.
    All these kinds of enemies are extremely unrealistic. That's what i call "unrealistic", not the dual wielding.
  5. Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

    SenorZorros said:
    @adrakken, that was almost a week ago. please stop pulling old cows out of the ditch...
    EDIT: this was written before the doublepost, I had to do some research.
    on the amazon's, do you know what full armour is? /EDIT

    Gondvanaz said:
    Wyzilla said:
    there is no such thing as dual wielding on the battlefield.
    So i guess you're a former warrior from the Early Medieval period. Let's see what we need in order to implement this "unexisting" skill. Hmmm... two weapons, one in each hand. We already got a weapon so basically we just need one more. What a surprise, isn't it?!!!

    But if you guys want to stay "historically accurate", then please don't use the dual wielding. It is not that hard, is it? I don't give a **** if they used two weapons, one in each hand or not. In fact the main question here is: Has there been or has there not been a dual wielding? The answer is: YES. Which makes it theoretically feasible. Its rarity doesn't matter, we are not gonna do an army of dimachaeri, i'm asking for dual wielding only for the protagonist.
    Wyzilla said:
    The only thing that should result from any character wielding two full length weapons is an impaled corpse on the ground.
    Your points is valid for farmers like you... sorry i mean keyboard wiseacres like you nowadays.
    Don't put everybody in the same pot!

    I don't think Warband's combat system is enoughly good and it doesn't seem enoughly realistic to me, the movements are far too robotic and monotonous. Saying it is a realism is an excuse.
    1. I want to rage but luckily a lot of more knowledgeable people have already talked abut it so... please watch this.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJBEDxh0RQw
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZNZyhNFSaE
    so he is correct.
    I wouldn't mind seeing it as an option though. except that I'm afraid angry idiots will swarm the forums complaining about how useless it would be.

    2. you should probably look to yourself before using an ad hominem on others.

    3. the combat system is a bit robotic and monotonous because it is not realistic enough. not because there is too much realism...
    These YouTube videos prove nothing. All these people are expressing their own points of view, i've got my own point of view and i don't need help to get my own conclusions.
    As i said dual wielding is theoretically feasible, historically accurate (dimachaeri) and  is all about your choice how you want to fight. If you don't like it and think it is unrealistic, then simply don't use this option cause after all  it is all about your preferences. Noone will hurt you if you don't use it. But i can't understand why the people try to prevent the rest of us who love this feature from using it!? Why do you even bother!?

    These knowledgeable people who spam with "this is utter nonsense" only because they don't like one's ideas definitely will not gain my respect. At least they should try to say something strong to make my wrong points stand out clearly.
  6. Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

    Wyzilla said:
    there is no such thing as dual wielding on the battlefield.
    So i guess you're a former warrior from the Early Medieval period. Let's see what we need in order to implement this "unexisting" skill. Hmmm... two weapons, one in each hand. We already got a weapon so basically we just need one more. What a surprise, isn't it?!!!

    But if you guys want to stay "historically accurate", then please don't use the dual wielding. It is not that hard, is it? I don't give a **** if they used two weapons, one in each hand or not. In fact the main question here is: Has there been or has there not been a dual wielding? The answer is: YES. Which makes it theoretically feasible. Its rarity doesn't matter, we are not gonna do an army of dimachaeri, i'm asking for dual wielding only for the protagonist.
    Wyzilla said:
    The only thing that should result from any character wielding two full length weapons is an impaled corpse on the ground.
    Your points is valid for farmers like you... sorry i mean keyboard wiseacres like you nowadays.
    Don't put everybody in the same pot!

    I don't think Warband's combat system is enoughly good and it doesn't seem enoughly realistic to me, the movements are far too robotic and monotonous. Saying it is a realism is an excuse.
  7. Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

    SenorZorros said:
    while I like combat stances. jump attacks, spin attacks and sword throws (excluding specialized blades) are far in the realm of fiction.

    I do aagree with dual wielding if only to allow parry blades as ong as it is implemented realistically. this means two swords would be extemely clumsy. a spear-and-dagger combination however would be a better option that allows for greater versitility.
    They are in the realm of fiction for an average soldier who is basically 1/2 farmer. These things are not impracticable for an experienced, agile and skillful warrior. I mean the weapons are heavy for people who use their hands mainly to press the buttons of the keyboard.

    Also only the most skilled warriors can dual wield properly. Like the dimachaeri - the rarest and most skilled gladiators. Maybe they have to put a certain skill level before gaining an access to dual wield, though the dual wielding is all about your choice how you want to fight in a melee. You just need one more weapon, that's it.

    And one more thing i would like to see - Testudo formation.

    I would pay an extra amount of money to get this kind of features
  8. Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 12 - The Passage Of Time

    Please, add a combat skill which allows the player to attack enemy's legs and the opposite - a skill which allows you to parry and block an attack directed to your legs. This is really common battle fighting skill which is not available in any game. This would make your game unique.
    Also i would like to see:

    - DUAL WIELDING!!!

    - Jump attacks with spears/swords
    tumblr_mino1shqMo1qg4blro1_500.gif


    - Spin attack/dodging

    achilles-vs-hector.jpg


    - Sword throwing

    6%20Swordthrow.jpg


    - Combat poses

    troy+achilles+04.jpg

    achilles_sword_sheath_3054.jpg

    achilles_vs_hector.png




Top Bottom