搜索结果: *

Dayoll 说:

Common sense ? So let's say a mad Viking went dual Wielding cause he wanted to find death in battle/duel/whatever fight, you'd tell me it would be impossible cause of common sense ?

It's not because it's not common that it has not existed. Common sense is just an argument of a guy living in an era, having no experience of past times that just guess based on his "knowledge" on the topic what could have and have not been at the time. Actually, there is not enough source material to make a proper assessment on the matter.

Again, it could have it's place. Just don't use it. Why refuse the possibility to people, if you're not encouraged and have the possibility, to not use it ?

点击展开...

I thought we were talking about battlefields and armies. My apologies.
I edited to include my opinion on duels as well.

SpectreSC 说:

See the various sources I've linked that can counter your point on how "hard" it was to wield two weapons effectively, you'll be pleasantly surprised how wrong you are.



Yes, two one-handed weapons was usually the choice of preference in dueling and other single combat for exactly these reasons. It was advantageous. You also have more control over the flow of combat because of how versatile it can be.



In open warfare? Of course I'd take a shield! Anyone would, like I said... would you like an arrow in your arse? Of course not. No one is saying otherwise here

The only silly claim here being made by most people is that dual-wielding is "fantasy" when it's not. If it was "fantasy" then I guess all of our previous known history may as well be called "fantasy" too ?

点击展开...

I was strictly talking about duels here.
I did not negate the fact that it was used in some cases for dueling. Typically with a shorter weapon in the offhand.

I was just pointing out how someone would prefer other styles over dual wielding even in duels where you can choose your arms.
Why do you think most duels use the same weapon type/combination? It just wouldn't be fair to compare apples to oranges when trying to determine skill. Dual wielding isn't some superior form of dueling arms combination, it is just that a combination of weapons.
In my experience, in duels where you can choose your arms, people tend to choose longer range or better protection. Otherwise good luck blocking that twohanded sword with a blocking dagger/short offhand weapon.

That being said, we are talking about M&B Bannerlord here. Do you agree that dual wielding should not be on the battlefield of calradia? Because this is what the topic is about. I'm not against having dual wielding in duels, it could be really fun.

Edit: The part about 'fantasy' was referring to dual wielding on the battlefield. I said it would be really cool to see in fantasy settings that way.

Dayoll 说:

And again, evyrone here is an Historian, lived in actual 10th BC or 16th century and whatnot.

Just, we don't care, put Dual Wield into the game if it's possible. It could be a great addition to the game for some people that want to play some High Combat master (a bit of fantasy) or a f****ng Bandit boss that just Dual Wield. Where is the problem.

You don't like it, you don't use it. It's as simple as that. It wont break your immersion or game if it's just for single player (or maybe a branch of some Battanian/Sturgian troops like someone said, berserkers, but you know they wont last long).

A bit of "hollywood show" is sometimes interesting, to make things a bit more epic for some people.
Just stop your ranting about history. History is just a big guess (At least about the most obscure topics like this one) as long as we don't have a time machine to properly see it with our own eyes.

点击展开...

You don't need to be a historian in order to know how to fight or have common sense.

I'm not against dual wielding in fantasy settings, but it has no palce in vanilla imo.

Edit: People don't want to die, so they'll use techniques that are effective. When they fought for show, sure, you see dual wielding. (gladiators, some japanese martial arts and european duels sometimes with mostly dagger in offhand)

SpectreSC 说:

This is categorically false, at least "biomechanically unviable", whatever that means

It was common in duels and in tournaments, people carried two swords frequently as well in cities and elsewhere. It just wasn't used on the battlefield because of the obvious... do you want an arrow in your arse? ?

Nothing "High Fantasy" about it.

点击展开...

I'll elaborate on that, since you don't understand what I mean.
The fact that you need your whole body muscles to work together, to deliver an effective cut, means that the offhand is in no position to deliver an effective cut. You could argue that you can cut with the offhand after you are done cutting with the main hand. But that isn't really any faster than just cutting with the main hand again, at that point. Meaning that the only advantage is blocking with either hand while simultaneously delivering a cut/thrust with the other hand. At that point you defaulted to use one weapon mainly for blocking at any given time.

Sure, in some instances, you could thrust from two angles when you are closer to your sparring partner or enemy.
And unless you control their sword at that range, you will get impaled as well.

So yes...if you had a choice of using one onehanded weapon or two onehanded weapons, you might as well choose two onehanded weapons since you get an advantage.
However, if you could choose a shield/buckler or a longer twohanded weapon. I don't think anyone would choose two onehanded weapons given the choice.

Even is some madmen did use it, it doesn't mean it's effective or common. It's simply biomechanically unviable.

However, it's always cool in high fantasy settings. Where some races and cultures are reckless like that

Vaegris hired nordic mercenaries which settled there, combining their cultures and now they are called Sturgia. At least that's what I heard happened.
Don't quote me on this.

Neofd10 说:

I personally would like slingers, but I would prefer more archers. Slingers were commonly used by Iron Age celts, but for early medieval celts it was mostly bows and javelins. The welsh in particular were very well known for their archery. Slings would be cool, but for the time period that Bannerlord is set, the surviving Celtic nations were not using slings as much. Maybe the Irish there an exception, but I don’t know. Good idea though. I just love archers and I’m Welsh!

点击展开...

That is true. There are even crossbows which were used by the post-roman picts. These are all examples to not let battania be a culture that uses 80-90% infantry and let them be true to their skirmishing based tactics.

Find daughter quest:
- Got to village where they were hiding.
- Tasked Teenager to find daughter.
- I found daughter first and opened dialogue.
- Teenager came, opened dialogue with me.
- Crash

Same here with Pen Cannoc, can't complete my quest because of this. (Deliver herd of sheep.)