Jousting - a different way...

[Wood]

Using the Lance in battle can be good fun. However, I think that it is too automatic and it gets a bit boring after a while. I propose a manual system of using a lance that requires a bit more skill but allows a lot more flexibility:


Normally the lance is in the upright position, the ready position.

To couch the lance, look forward and hold down the LMB.

The lance remains couched for as long as you hold the LMB.

You can aim the lance up and down and side to side by looking in the desired direction. It can only aim in a small forward arc, about 30 degrees to either side.

The damage delivered is directly related to your speed, the faster you go, the higher the damage.

When blocking with a shield the lance goes to the upright position.

To lunge the lance, or swing a swingable polearm, look over the left or right side of your horse and click-hold-release the LMB in the standard way.


I would prefer this method as you could aim side to side which would make hitting moving targets easier, joust to the left over a barrier as was common in competitions, and it is more realistic as a rider could quite easily aim to the side to get a better hit.
The lance would remain in a sensible upright position when blocking with a shield, not behind the rider.
A banner could be attached to the lance displaying your colours and family crest, and would blow in the breeze as you rode towards the enemy.

What do you think?

 

[WipperSnipper]

I used to played "Siege Mod" for Battlefield 1942 , And that had that exact lance system. Although the horse's were crap , so was the combat system and stuff.

In that it could take you up to 20 charge's to hit someone. Although that was online , and the collide detection was bad.

Although i support the idea. I think it would add some more fun to lancing rather then concentrating on getting your speed high enough all the time.

 

[GonZ]

I would actually like to see the traditional jousting as part of the game.

You have a barrier down the middle of the tourney field and you joust over it. The scoring system works on broken lances I think. This would be good as an extra type of tourney contest, not as a replacement for the general melee style tournies we have at the moment.

 

[Qoatl]

Damage would have to be proportional not only to speed, but also to the inverse of the angle of the lance relative to the direction of the horse. The force imparted by the lance onto the target would be proportional to the component of the force vector that lies in the direction of movement of the horse. This force would be further decreased by torque placed on the lance as it struck at an angle, causing some of the momentum behind the lance to be lost in the form of rotational velocity imparted onto the lance and fulcrum (the rider). A lance at thirty degrees relative to the facing of the horse would generate a significantly smaller impulse at the point of impact than a lance pointed in the direction of movement, even at the same speed.

 

[compfreak]

That idea sounds interesting, but I know enough physics to see a problem: you are describing something in two dimensions. I imagine the damage formula would become much more complex when you factor in the vertical position of the lance, because the maximum impulse (I think, force doesn't sound like the right term) would be imparted when the lance was parallel with the horse’s vertical and horizontal movement. You can’t just take the angle of the lance relative to the ground, either, because it would cause problems on hills. This may be just more trouble than it’s worth.

 

[Bigwig]

Damnit, I spend all summer trying to forget about mechanics, and now this. Jerks

 

[Wood]

I'm slightly confused, but I am doing physics at A-level so I think I understand what you are saying.

As both the force lost by the moment (rotational force) and the forward component of the force are (approxamately) directly proportional to the angle of the lance relative to the direction of the horse's momentum, a multiplier (a) could be used instead of calculating the exact force at the tip of the lance. While not entirely accurate, this would simplify the damage equation a lot.

The damage could be worked out a bit like this:

Your speed minus the enemy's speed relative to you (b), this is already calculated for working out damage bonuses.

The angle of the lance relative to the direction of the horse (simplified from the the direction of the horse's momentum), worked out by taking the absolute direction of the horse and subtracting the absolute direction of the lance. This must then be squared and square-rooted to ensure the result is positive. This is the horizontal angle (c). The same should be done with the vertical inclination to get the vertical angle (d). Add (c) and (d) and then multiply the constant (a) to get (e).

(b) divided by (e) multiplied by (f), a damage constant based on the damage of the weapon, the proficiency with polearms and the opponents armour.

That should equal the damage dealt to the opponent.

Phew...


GonZ:
I totally agree, I have a book around here somewhere...
In 1465 the Earl of Worcester invented this scoring system:
Knock your opponent off his horse = 5 points
Break the tip of your lance = 1 point
Hit your opponents horse with your lance = MINUS 1 point

In some tournaments they also had crests on their helmets, small round disks displaying their families coat of arms.

Hitting this crest = 5 points.

Come on, please put this into the game. Jousting is very fun.

 

[Ingolifs]

Modelling physics in three dimensions is easy when you have i,j and k, or if you know how to work vectors properly.

Although for the lance damage, i would have assumed it would just be the momentum of the lance thrust plus (momentum of horse and rider times the cosine of the angle that the lance is at)

P(lance)+(P(horse)cos(angle))

That would give you a very simple model.

The mechanics of the stuff that happens when you actually hit an enemy are quite complicated, i'd imagine.

I'm guessing that damage from a blunt object would be related to the force (change in momentum/change in time) that is exerted on an enemy.
The problem with a sharp object is that it does not actually exert that much force on an object. Once it pierces an object, it passes through relatively unhindered, and the only way the tip slows down is if it encounters lots of friction. Thrusting a lance at a funny angle (30 degrees) means that the lance head doesn't hit the person in a way that can actually pierce him. In fact, the more i think about it, the more complicated it becomes. There would indeed be problems with having the lance rotate somewhat, which will mean it won't impart as much force as it could if it was rigid. THe amount of lance rotation is dependant (among other things) on the actual physical strength of the person holding the lance, because if he can make the lance as rigid as possible, it won't rotate as much when he hits someone with it.

 

[Qoatl]

the maximum impulse (I think, force doesn't sound like the right term) would be imparted when the lance was parallel with the horse’s vertical and horizontal movement.

Two things:

First, the horse's direction of movement at any point in time is essentially along a single dimension. That means you would only need the one component of the vector of the position of the lance that lies along the horse's axis of movement. Let's say we call whatever direction the horse is moving the X-axis. It doesn't matter if the lance can move along one plane (two dimensions) or two planes (three dimensions). In the former case, you could break the vector down into X and Y components while, in the latter, you would need three components to fully describe the vector (X, Y, and Z). In either case, only the X-component of the vector would have any bearing on the force imparted to the target.

Second, impulse is an important term when considering something like a lance striking another body. Impulse is the force multiplied by the time (in seconds) over which the force is applied. Smaller impulse would mean more deformation (in this case, more damage). While impulse is important to jousting, it is not really what we're talking about here (my fault for using the term in my first post). The energy delivered by the force of the lance striking the individual can accomplish a number of different things. The force can deform the target (or the lance, for that matter), it can impart an acceleration to the target, and it can create heat. There is a finite amount of energy generated by the lance and imparted to the lance-target system. Assuming heat is negligable, then all of the energy goes into accelerating the target or deforming the target and/or lance. The goal in using a lance to win a real battle would be to deform the target as much as possible, while the goal in tournament jousting would be to minimally deform the target such that the maximum energy possible could go into acceleration of the target (thus knocking him from his horse).


IRT Wood: I believe the point of a good joust strike is to hit as closely as possible to the center of gravity of the target, keeping rotational force as close to zero as possible.

 

[WipperSnipper]

I don't understand why you people are thinking of all that "crap" , why can't we just have the lance damage the goddam same?

I mean not *EVERYTHING* has to be 100% realistic. And especially not if you expect armargen to program all that crap.

Why can't there just be an option to move the lance up down , left and right. You don't need to worry about the crap of , if a lance hit's someone sideway's it wont do as much damage.

 

[Lunchbox]

Only possible change I can think of for the lance (I think it works great already) is the option of using your shield to defend while couched with the lance. However, to keep it balanced the defense arc of the shield would have to be VERY small in front of the player. This is just because early on in jousting they sometimes used shields to deflect the lance point (holding the shield at an angle so the lance point slides off). At least, that's what I've heard, and my memory is hardly accurate on the matter.

 

[Wood]

Why can't there just be an option to move the lance up down , left and right. You don't need to worry about the **** of , if a lance hit's someone sideway's it wont do as much damage.

Yes, keeping the damage simple will proberly be better for everyone involved. How did I get involved in a maths discussion???

So, side to side aiming when jousting. I think that it is pretty vital, aiming with the keyboard alone is just to cumbersome for me. I'm sure that most people would want a jousting competition if it was possible, aiming to the left over a central divide was the most common form.

 

[Ryuta]

So, is it a discussion about lancing, or Jousting? The first post looks like a couched lance controlling... I'd vote for your suggestion about controlling, Wood. Couching should be more player oriented action.

And I don;t like the idea of jousting. The joust everyone would think is much later than the period the game is depicting. And besides, the tournament master calls it 'melee'. Which means combat game between two parties. If my memory is correct, until middle to late medieval, tournament is a combat simulation. set in a gigantic field and fought by two group of knights (sometimes over 100) with UNBLUNTED weapon. Death was common.
Moreover, later joust became a kind of ceremony rather than gambling you can pop in.

 

[Wood]

The poll is about manual lance control with added side to side aiming. And keeping the lance in a sensible position when blocking with a shield.

About tournament jousting:
The Normans invented "Jousing" at around 1000 AD when the stopped throwing their spears and used them under the arm to stab instead.
The first reported case of Jousting for sport in England was in 1048.
The first organised Jousting tournaments took place around 1090.
Jousting became acceptable by the church, well organised and very popular around 1190.
The first "Round Table Tournament" was held in 1226 and included many events including the javin throw, casting the stone, foot fights with various weapons (swords, axes ect) and Jousting!!
In the late Middle-ages Jousting went a lot more colourful and posey, and they added a scoring system to find the winner.
BUT, Jousting was popular thoughout the Middle-ages and in my opinion, not including it would be a mistake and would tarnish a great game about Middle-aged combat.

 

[DeathMouse]

Have we all forgot or what? The lance was created as a means to dismount enemy mounted troops.
What is a wounded knight under an iron plate that weighs half of what he is? A cockroach waiting for your shoe!
This has got to be what is missing. I mean seriously, with the forces involved hear and what is being attacked, most of the time bandits, against the force of your lance and their armour not even taken into account because your using a piercing weapon would be impaled on it! Yet half the time u spend chasing them! ARG!

 

[Sir Saladin]

The lance is just a big fancy spear and can only be used while charging on a horse and it is deadly unless you are getting hit with machine guns. American plains indians used a lance and they did really good with it. I would like to have one on one combat. In the novel Le Morte D'Arther by Sir Thomas Mallory the crazy knights of the round table would get into single combat all the time, maybe just hanging around a bridge for a couple of days and whenever some other knight came along he would give the challenge "Will we fight for love or fight to the death?" Fighting for love meant fighting for the love of battle so that when the knight that lost was getting his helmet dragged off of his head he could say "mercy" and he would either lose his horse or be captured and thrown into a dungeon until his daddy paid a ransom. That would be fun unless I actually had to live like that, then it would stink. I'm just a dumb guy I'm not a scholar I feel like I went over the river and through the woods with this one but a jousting match against just one guy in this game would be kick ass. It could be great if you knocked some baron of of his horse or even if you got beat.