Hitting Multiple People

[Bjorn The Broken]

concerning immersion

I can not understand how can this change something. Cleaving through mutiple people can be immersive to you while someone else might not be and these things, which are potential consumer ideas, are so important to TW than anything else. Immersion is the first thing we shoul complain or praise about in the first place. Because if something is not immersive to you, you won't buy it.

 

[lolbash]

Did you even read the answer I gave you?

I don't feel like I am in the realm of Calradia.

You ARE in the realm of Calradia. Taleworlds have decided that AOE attacks for 2 handed weapons are possible in Calradia. If you think that breaks immersion, then you are stomping on what Taleworlds decided what Calradia is.

Remember that real life is not the same as Calradia, and I am glad it stays this way. If you do not want a world where 2 handed weapons can hit multiple people then go back to playing Warband, since warband Calradia does not have that feature.

Or go back to real life if you like it there so much.

 

[Bjorn The Broken]

I wish I hadn't read it.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

You are still free to complain about balance, which is what the last 15 pages of this thread was about, but I am saying how when we are concerning immersion, it is stupid to talk about because of reason I said above.

What I don't think you understand is that immersion is pretty important to a lot of people, and one of the most contentious parts of game design, so you can't just dismiss discussion on the topic simply because you personally can't make sense of why.

Immersion is directly linked to gameplay too. The reason you don't need a manual for a lot of games is because they follow real world rules to some extent. You apply your understanding of tangible physics to make jumps in mario, even though none of the game is realistic.
Bannerlord doesn't have to be realistic for it to make sense. It's a game, but games are ostensibly gamified variations on reality. Every game ever made is based on the real. Cleave is a borderline case since people can't decide on whether it would be possible or not (spoiler alert: it wouldn't), but more important than that is how it feels. If a game "feels" wrong in core mechanics then it's impossible to play naturally, and the gameplay is basically ruined.

Taleworlds have decided that AOE attacks for 2 handed weapons are possible in Calradia. If you think that breaks immersion, then you are stomping on what Taleworlds decided what Calradia is.

This is a really weird argument. Calradia isn't real, is designed to be totally secondary to the mechanics, and you can't use taleworld's grand epic flawless vision of their sweeping epic lore (which they've retconned several times within their own game) to cement a game mechanic.
I will absolutely step and defecate all over taleworld's vision for calradia if I don't like a feature. Why should anybody care about ruining the lore which hasn't even been decided yet? This is a video game still in development, not lord of the rings.

I'm not sure why I responded to that. This is your most far-fetched post to date.

 

[Bluehawk]

Please add combos and scores so we can get those sick S-ranks.

 

[lolbash]

What I don't think you understand is that immersion is pretty important

I think you are missing the point. We are not discussing the importance of immersion. We are discussing why two handed AOE attacks are not immersion breaking.

but more important than that is how it feels. If a game "feels" wrong in core mechanics then it's impossible to play naturally, and the gameplay is basically ruined.

AOE attacks for 2 handed weapons is not a new mechanic. Multiple games have tried this before like Dynasty Warriors, For Honor, League of Legends, and so far no one I know has complained about how the player in those games can do spinny attacks that hit and kill multiple people.

This is enough evidence that AOE attacks are really not that immersion breaking as people in this thread are making it out to be.

Why should anybody care about ruining the lore which hasn't even been decided yet? 

Except there is already lore they clearly want to start planting and writing early. Especially with the inclusion of a Story Mode, and the multiple developer blogs that only talk about the lore of the Calradic universe. That is enough to know that they are serious about the Calradic world.

This is a video game still in development, not lord of the rings.

Said who? Bannerlord is Armagan's baby and life work. For all we know he could have poured his heart and soul into the story mode and lore of the game enough that it can very well rival Lord of the Rings.

If lore is not important to the game then what is Armagan doing by hiring a full time political professor Steve Negus into the Taleworlds office?

 

[Bjorn The Broken]

Dynasty Warriors, League of Legends? Yeah, very relevant.

 

[lolbash]

I mentioned those games because they included swordsmen melee fighters that have the ability to do AOE attacks.

How come no one is ever complaining about how AOE attacks are unrealistic in those games? Maybe its because AOE attacks are not immersion breaking at all.

 

[Evelyn]

maybe because they're completely different games that try to accomplish different things

whodda thunk

 

[lolbash]

And what do you think Bannerlord is trying to accomplish?

 

[John the Roleplayer]

And what do you think Bannerlord is trying to accomplish?

From the steam storepage:

"...medieval combat simulator...detailed fighting system...historically authentic defensive structures...medieval warfare experience...simulated feudal economy...deep, physics-based system..."

While none of that explicitly precludes AOE attacks, do you honestly believe that this describes a world where they would be immersive?

 

[Cpt. Nemo]

How come no one is ever complaining about how AOE attacks are unrealistic in those games? Maybe its because AOE attacks are not immersion breaking at all.

How can you miss the point so completely? They aren't complaining because those games aren't trying to be realistic in the slightest. They are designed completely differently, and aren't trying to have any degree of realism.

 

[SenorZorros]

If the devs want to break the laws of physics they need really good arguments. otherwise...
concerning immersion cleaving is bull**** because we use our reference frame and there is no reason to assume calradia is different.

 

[Ultibossme3]

I don't see a problem. This makes it so groupfights are not just spam the outnumbered until they die and actually give them breathing room. plus, ut would be pretty weird to be holding a big axe and not be able to hit multiple people with it.

Also Im sure Taleworlds already know of this and made it so that they do reduced damage based on armor or something.

You're worrying too much. Trust in Taleworlds.

In multiplayer, people will still spam it

 

[Orion]

Cleave is a borderline case since people can't decide on whether it would be possible or not (spoiler alert: it wouldn't), but more important than that is how it feels. If a game "feels" wrong in core mechanics then it's impossible to play naturally, and the gameplay is basically ruined.

Spoiler alert: it depends*

One could quite feasibly cleave through a single limb, though I would agree that any blow to the torso shouldn't have any chance of cleaving (with the possible exception of glancing/deflected blows, i.e. you may as well have not hit them at all). Of course this is further dependent on the armor of the person being hit, but cleaving is still within the realm of possibility.

I feel there's just this collective, assumed straw-man in this thread that any degree of cleaving must include full-on penetration of a person's core, and therefore any amount of cleaving is unrealistic. This isn't an all-or-nothing issue. Why does everything have to be in absolutes?

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

If cleaving only involves limbs or slight penetrations, and only on unarmoured opponents, then it would be watered down so much that it might as well not even be there. That's the problem. For cleave to be any use in curbing AI or player blobbing it would have to be absurdly over-exaggerated to the point where you'd be cutting straight through weapons, bone structures, unraised shields and armour.

 

[Roccoflipside]

Cleave is a borderline case since people can't decide on whether it would be possible or not (spoiler alert: it wouldn't), but more important than that is how it feels. If a game "feels" wrong in core mechanics then it's impossible to play naturally, and the gameplay is basically ruined.

Spoiler alert: it depends*

One could quite feasibly cleave through a single limb, though I would agree that any blow to the torso shouldn't have any chance of cleaving (with the possible exception of glancing/deflected blows, i.e. you may as well have not hit them at all). Of course this is further dependent on the armor of the person being hit, but cleaving is still within the realm of possibility.

I feel there's just this collective, assumed straw-man in this thread that any degree of cleaving must include full-on penetration of a person's core, and therefore any amount of cleaving is unrealistic. This isn't an all-or-nothing issue. Why does everything have to be in absolutes?

Only sith deal in absolutes! 
If they could get it to work with cleaving through limbs (especially if you could chop arms/legs/etc. off), then it wouldn't be too bad in my opinion. However, I agree with Kentucky James that at that point it might just be a non-issue that only pops up in very rare circumstances.

 

[Vissy]

If cleaving is damage-based then that should address many of the problems people have raised here. I'm not necessarily that hung-up on how realistic cleaving is (or is not), but rather its effects on gameplay. Groupfights are chaotic, and in Warband at least there's often a lot of dynamic movement where several players are constantly switching targets to gain the advantage. In singleplayer cleaving seems like a great mechanic, mainly because bots cheat and form conga lines of death, but in multiplayer if the cleave mechanic is made too easy to utilize it could have some significant effects on groupfights. I'm not necessarily saying that those would be bad effects. I could see it encouraging people to play more with their team, because the cleave is a really strong mechanic and so getting hit would carry a much higher risk than it does without cleave (because groupfights are fought in close quarters and getting hit could mean your teammate getting hit as well, dying, and losing the fight). Could it really be all that bad?

 

[KhergitLancer80]

When you get overwhelmed by your enemies, you must get overwhelmed.
This is how it works irl and so it should be in the game.

Dont come to me wirh f>r bull**** rainbow, there is no fun in this.

It is part of the game, it was always part of the game to take your steps carefully so that you dont get overwhelmed. It is a gamebreaking design choice to turn this into a rewarding mistake rather than punishing mistake.

TW, it needs to go. SERIOUSLY.

 

[SenorZorros]

if it were limbs we wouldn't be discussing this. I refer back to the op which has some gifs which clearly show it isn't just about limbs though. it's about cleaving through a horse's body.