搜索结果: *

Tale Words 说:

Thank you for this very insightful post!

Never thought about rest animations. So in the 2H sword vs 2H sword scenario, does rest animation (ie. sword point upright vs sword at waist with sword point facing enemy) also matter for the left and right chamber blocks? Or will these two chamber blocks (ie. chambering horizontal slashes at my left and right flanks) usually be successful regardless of rest stance?

Thank you again for the great reply.

点击展开...

In this scenario, the rest animation will technically have some effect. For the waist held sword facing the enemy (I think I'll refer to these types of animations as "transition rests"), you'll have a nice sweeping animation in both directions regardless of stance due to it being held in the center.

As for the default rest animations, you'll have a wider swing animation if you chamber to the opposite side of your stance. So if you're in the right stance with the sword resting on your right, you'll have an easier time chambering attacks on your left and vice versa for the left stance. Now, you can still pretty easily chamber attacks on the same side as your default rest because 2H swords still have a good enough windup from that position.

Also, here's some general information regarding chambers: Chambering is only really possible when your weapon is roughly equivalent in speed or faster than your opponents. Lengthy weapons also have an easier time due to having a wider swing to catch the enemy's swing animation, assuming the weapon isn't too slow. Therefore, the theoretical best weapons for chambering would have good length, handling, and speed. Also, there are 3 different animations sets to learn for chambering which are 1H weapons (no shield), 2H swords, and pole arms (including 2H axes). Another tidbit, you can chamber attacks behind you.

Chambers are heavily reliant on the transitional animations because your windup swing has to physically connect with the incoming attack. So generally, it's actually easier to chamber if your weapon is on the opposite side of the incoming attack because your windup swing will be more pronounced. If you hold a block in the correct direction and then try to chamber from that position, you'll have a very small window to chamber because your weapon isn't moving much.

Now, it's also important to note that different rest states and stances will affect your windup animation. So, in your example, the most reliable way to chamber an overhead with a 2H sword would be to hold a downward block and then do an overhead attack. Or, you can tap downward block and let your weapon go into the rest animation where your character holds the sword at his waist with the point facing the enemy and overhead from there. That's one of the most reliable animations for a 2H sword to overhead chamber regardless of stance, but of course it isn't really practical to play that way because the rest state only lasts a few seconds. Your crosshair placement shouldn't really matter much when you use a reliable wind up animation.

steffenbk1 说:

Made this with RBM to resemble the 2016

点击展开...

Nice. I'll have to check it out.

So, is the collision system going to be improved upon more in the future? While it's better now, it's still not good.

Must have been too complicated for the player to understand and not fun.

Duhk_Tails 说:

Slavers should all have Judaean names to be historically accurate.

点击展开...

Also, give them the ability to spread subversive ideologies and provoke civil wars.

I would recommend that you at least wait until the full game is released and then check back on the state of the game. Many of the mods will be broken on each new update and a fair number of mods have ceased updating. The vanilla game is not worth $50 in its current state and there are many core issues that need to be resolved.

I would, however, recommend picking up their previous game Mount and Blade: Warband. It's only $20 and you can get it for much cheaper on sale. It has many mods and even the vanilla version is very playable. While the visuals aren't very modern, the game has a lot of charm to it. The infantry combat is much better and soldiers and cavalry have proper collision in battle.

Let me point you to this thread -->The Big Problem with Unit Collision. The most that has been said about it is that it's being looked into, and that was quite a while ago.

steffenbk1 说:

Has these been addressed yet or acknowledged by the devs?

点击展开...

No, they have not.

Thanks you for coming here to comment...it seems that this topic is not interesting enough ? .

点击展开...

I don't know how it isn't more discussed. I feel like its one of the most game/experience breaking things in the game right now.

I fiddled with the collision size several patches ago and while I'm not entirely sure, it seemed like there is a discrepancy between allied and enemy collision sizes. When you increase the collision size, your allies are no longer packed like sardines but it also feels like there's a strange bubble that prevents you from getting too close to an enemy agent. I don't know if it might have to do with the pushing mechanics or if agents just have a proportionally larger collision with enemies compared to allies. Also, thanks for the heads up about the mod.

In testing all this I have come across a problem, which has always been there for us players (since we have had access to the game). However, this problem does not seem to appear in the 2016 videos. I mean, when the bodies of the agents collide with each other in close quarters; there is a shaking of the agents causing an extremely annoying jittering in the player's camera. Perhaps a problem with kinematic physics?

点击展开...

In one of the old 2016 gameplays, Lust briefly talks about the engine being able to handle new physics interactions between infantry vs cavalry and heavy infantry vs lighter infantry. You can hear what he said at 25:27 - 25:55 in the video.



From what I gather, it seems the shaking and jittering might be the result of an intended pushing mechanic. If that's the case, I don't think it really works for a Mount and Blade game, or at least not in the way its implemented. I think it'd be different if pushing were only possible while walking and the reaction to being pushed was well animated instead of just sliding across the ground. It also really messes up cavalry vs infantry combat when cavalry can just run through 5+ ranks of infantry while sliding everyone out of place, making everything feel weightless.

P.S. Anyone feel like the current face creation is a little too restrictive compared to the 2016 version at the start of the vid?

nettlefingers 说:

I disagree.

I stopped playing both Chivalry and, to a lesser extent, Mordhau due to the ridiculous, super-human, lightning fast spikes in angular acceleration of the player body, footwork, and weapon that can be achieved with really un-natural movements (such has looking down at the ground, and then swinging an overhead accel with full damage). Over a network, these spikes make combat un-fun since they aren't perceptible due the lack of the full sensory feedback in a real fight. We only have a keyboard and mouse to work with.

This baked in delay may not achieve 100% realism, but it prevents the overall feeling and look of a fight from being so arcade-y. The devs put a lot of thought and intention into this and I see exactly why. I don't want a Chivalry clone. Devs, please don't fall for the cries to return to arcade combat.

Maybe, all that is needed is to tweak the sensitivity of the block/swing direction so that it doesn't require such an exaggerated movement to block a certain direction.

点击展开...

Except Warband never had the problems that Chivalry and Mordhau had. Hitting someone with the start or end of your swing made you whiff off, and blocking could match the pace of feinting. All this attack delay does is make combat sluggish and it especially screws over holds and stabs. The only attacks you should even bother using are non held left and right swings to mitigate attack delay and because the arcs are so wide its impossible to miss. As for visual looks, Bannerlord is far more unreadable due to the animation blending system mixing with feints and late swing cancels that can phase through enemies.

A big part of Bannerlord's problem is it inverts which aspects of combat should be fast or slow. Readying attacks, releasing attacks, and blocking should be quick and snappy to allow for skillful reactive gameplay. Readability was never an issue Warband had with these. Bannerlord makes these three aspects really sluggish while making swing speeds for weapons overall a little faster and making feinting unreadable, making it harder to react in combat. To top it off, movement speed is overall faster and more weightless in Bannerlord (with the exception of backpedaling). This combined with the sluggish dueling controls encourages you to spin away from an enemy if you fail to hit to deny them a counter attack, rinse and repeat. If they do manage to hit you in the back, it doesn't matter because you don't get slowed down like you would in Warband.

The biggest issue I've seen in infantry vs. infantry fights is that the collision capsules for allies are too small so the bots will almost stand inside each other and only perform overheads or stabs so they'll hit more often. You can have hundreds of infantry but they'll somehow condense into an unbelievably thin line. This makes it so that fights are over way too quickly and it over emphasizes numbers over quality.

As for infantry vs. cavalry fights, cavalry doesn't really get slowed down by bumping into infantry so they can indefinitely ride through deep ranks of infantry while sliding people aside. On top of that, neither the cavalry nor the infantry is really accurate against each other so they aren't even able to consistently perform kills. So, cavalry mainly ends up mainly killing people with non stop charge damage.

A big issue with all formations is that infantry constantly lower their shields or they don't even raise them in the first place. Even with their shields up, the shields don't provide enough coverage against archers from the front. When infantry is in circle formation, any casualties result in them constantly shifting around to plug in gaps on the opposite side of the circle, rather than just shrinking the circle to keep up. Another problem with the circle and square formation is you can't adjust the size of them and how hollow or deep you want them.

I think it could also be an issue with allied collision boxes being too small as the bots can basically get really compact and stand inside of each other.

You're pretty much forced to abuse it to do anything with it. If you play normally and don't run circles, the slow speed and bad handling lets you get spammed way too easily.

I'm not sure why the menavlion is even usable on horseback as it's a pike/glaive type weapon for infantry use, even historically.

My issue with 1 hand weapons versus lances/spears is that polearms completely overshadow 1 hand weapons. In Warband, lances promoted the cycle and charge playstyle while sidearms offered a higher risk, higher reward playstyle (more fun personally) where you could weave through a melee and dish out more dps with a sword by quickly acquiring different targets. With the current mechanics in Bannerlord, you're railroaded into only the cycle and charge playstyle for several reasons:

• Spears and lances attack faster than in Warband and deal damage earlier in the animation
• Lances can be re-couched instantly after a successful couch
• Couches stay active indefinitely and can even stay active while going up hills (horses don't really lose speed going uphill)
• You can stab your lance through your horse's head, the area that protects the rider the most
• Low maneuverability at low speeds makes it more advantageous to stay at high speed, which plays to the lance's strength. Even at low speeds the lance/spear is better because you need the reach to compensate for your inability to turn.
• 1 hand weapon swings are imprecise and force you to aim your camera into the ground

As for getting stuck in infantry blobs, I don't know if anyone was actually complaining about dying in one. Charging into infantry blobs is actually more forgiving in Bannerlord because horses can just pass through multiple ranks without slowing down while dealing significant charge damage. And both the cavalry and infantry AI are pretty bad at actually hitting each other. Part of this is might be due to the smaller collision that allows the bots to partially stand inside each other.

Bumping infantry is a much bigger problem in multiplayer because even a low speed hit can leave you on the ground for enough time for someone to hit you so many times. And then allied cavalry, even enemy cav sometimes, can slide you across the ground a long distance. I played a custom battle where enemy cav dragged me through a dense infantry square for like 25 feet.

They're bugged as well. If you hold an attack, then move in the opposite direction and feint in the same direction again, the movement speeds get reversed. This video I took is pretty old but it still works today.

guisadop 说:

Yeah, mounted combat feels REALLY weird. I thought it was just a matter of getting used to it at first but you can barely hit soldier who are at your sides, even with the longest swords.

点击展开...

There are a few reasons for this. Cavalry has very poor maneuverability at low speeds and the swing arcs don't line up where you'd expect them to. Also, the mounted left swing has much shorter reach compared to the right swing. The left swing was shorter in Warband also, but not by that much.

Bumping and swinging into infantry doesn't really work either because bumps typically knock infantry all the way down even at low speeds. There isn't really a mini bump like in Warband. Also, you might sometimes slide infantry away from you with your horse. I don't know if its an intended mechanic, but infantry and horses can slowly push other agents out of the way and slide them across the ground.