Sir Robin的最近内容

Can any of us prove irrefutably that crafting a sword is, in fact, more difficult than crafting a morningstar??  Or vice versa?  Unless anyone here is a blacksmith, who specializes in and has made a number of both, no.  Even if someone was, it'd likely still be a matter of their own opinion, as they may just be more skilled at one than the other.  And what's all this about assertions and proof and dismissal anyway?  I don't remember seeing Descartes on the guest list...    If we want to get down to the nitty gritty, everything ever asserted, including gravity and existence is mere speculation, backed by some degree of sense-experiential support.  Christopher Hitchens can dismiss my ass.

Besides, none of this conversation even matters - we were sneezed into existence by the Great Green Arkleseizure.  Geez, everybody knows that. 

What Rannen is saying is that if your morningstar is off balance (i.e. mass unevenly distributed through the striking head, or a slightly crooked haft [insert bent penis quip here]) it ceases to be equally wieldy in all directions.  An extreme example would be for the MS to be so off-balance as to have an egg-shaped head.  You would be forced to strike with the larger end of the egg to deliver the optimal blow.  In effect, it becomes more like an Indian war club:



The same holds true of a more reasonably unbalanced morningstar, if to a lesser extent.

Also, you wouldn't be able to swing it laterally as effectively, without turning it to square up with the opponent.  Say your opponent sidesteps your downward swing.  You would likely wish to swing at him again, laterally, which can be done with a club-like weapon like a MS by swinging backhanded.  This wouldn't be as easy if it were off-balance.  In effect, an off-balance morningstar acquires hammer-like attributes, if not to the extent that it would in my example.

I think this is what Rannen means when he says you have to change the grip with a sword, or unbalanced MS - not that you actually shift your palm on the handle, but that you must rotate your wrist to swing on a new vector.


Note:  Just to what extent a slight malalignment would effect your swing I don't know, but I think that, physics-wise, one can safely argue that it would. 

I actually messed around with a freeware game called The Forge a few years back, with a control scheme like Die by the Sword.  It's relatively fun as I recall, though nothing approaching the scope of DBS.  It's arena combat.


http://gamehippo.com/cat/1-39_8.shtml

edit: replaced url with a working one.

I particularly enjoyed the geysers of blood... 

Overall a well-made, professional-looking video.  M&B can use that kind of grass-roots publicity. 

edit:  I also particularly like the way it seems to transition into the title screen at the end there - an intro video for future versions, perhaps?

Wow, look at that - Merrick didn't fabricate the possibility of .811's release as a willful effort to annoy and waste the time of the forum regs.  Go figure.

Maybe instead of sarcastically leaping down the throats of new members like Merrick (with his 2 posts), we could offer a more welcoming atmosphere at taleworlds.  Simply point the recruits in the direction of the search function (and maybe do some searching of your own before undercutting their queries so caustically.)  This forum is, or at least was when I joined, an open, warm community, not a hierarchical tribunal of chosen regulars, exclusive to newcomers.   
 

I find that the best solution to the mobbing effect is, quite simply, a lot of athletics and agility points.  My current character is an infantry fighter, specializing in archery.  He's able to pick off a lot of enemies before they even get within striking distance.  However, when they do inevitably close with me, my character is fast enough that he can simply turn and run a distance away, then turn around and resume firing across the short gap he just opened.  And when I run out of ammunition, my agility helps me swing rapidly enough to actually land blows, minimizing the stunlock effect.  I'm attempting to make a lone wolf character of him, as well, meaning I have no allies to fall back on.  It's very hard going, but I'm starting to see progress; I can kill groups of 12 or more mountain bandits (mounted and unmounted) singlehandedly as a low-level foot soldier.  So it is doable, just difficult.

edit: The only downfall I see to this style of play is that the enemies taunting cries of "Coward!" seem to me to be perfectly justified... 

More life-like cities with people walking around, the ability to crouch (as in crouch and shield oneself from a volley of arrows), unhorsing opponents with a strong enough blow, and besiegable cities.

Most people with "Commander" playstyles won't use autocalc. They'll go in to the battle and sit at their starting point on their horse, because for some reason, just being on the field makes your men fight better.

点击展开...

While I still think the system needs tweaking, this point makes sense.  If I was a lowly foot soldier being sent into battle, I think my confidence and zeal would be bolstered to see that my commander actually followed me, at least onto the field.  So much the better if he actually fought alongside me.

I suppose it could happen, yes, but I too think the auto-combat system gives too much credit to enemy forces.  I've tried the auto battle option, not been satisfied with the number of casualties I received, and retried the same battle by actually watching it unfold.  No casualties with the latter option.  I think the system needs to be tweaked so it better takes into account how battles in M&B actually progress.

I too have been getting a lot of negative speed bonuses (typically in the -30's), even when not moving away from opponents.

Thanks Armagan - you're too good to us. 

Thanks for the new version!!    However:

I too have issues with the shaders displaying in an otherworldy green/red/yellow flickering color

AND

In this release, as well as in .805 onward, I haven't been able to disable environment shadows.  The button to disable them is grayed out.  This results (for me) in a pretty substantial and unnecessary performance hit. (No more horse archery for me )  Anyone have any idea how to disable those?

In real life, round shields were much larger.  Moreover, in real life, one can crouch, being completely covered by said large round shield (I know this from experience).  In the game, if you choose to use a round shield, you are helpless against archers.  It's very frustrating not being able to do something which you could in real life and which would save you from being shot.  Instead, I get to be an eternal pincushion.  Archers were overpowered before, now they're so bad that I would modify them away if I knew how to.

点击展开...

I agree with Benny Moore; I feel that the ability to crouch would increase the defensive capabilities of the player and NPCs considerably.  I can't tell you how many times I've wished, while assailing a group of Swadian crossbowmen, that I could just raise my kite shield and crouch behind it, then stand and charge ahead when they reload (or even slowly advance at a crouch).  If the infantry under the player's control could do this as well, it could improve their survival rate, while not affecting the game's realism.  Also, the ability to crouch might come in handy when you're being charged by a swordsman on horseback - a sudden reduction of your height at the last second could save you a decapitation. 

One argument against crouching is that abusing it would reduce the game's realism.  A way to counter that would be to drastically decrease movement speed while crouched.

Maybe the ability to crouch and move at a reduced rate could be implemented in future versions?  Just a thought.

I think a wise move on Armagan's part would be to ensure that, when divvying up prisoners, the game always allocates plot NPCs to the player.  Just a thought for future releases.