M&B Combat balance/improvement suggestions

[Beelzebub]

One thing I think most people here love about M&B is it's great FPS melee combat that is simple, but at the same time feels very to play as it has that good mix of pacing that makes it seem realistic and also intense. Plus a whole like this, especially without any fantasy, is very original.

That said I've been thinking recently of how maybe it could be improved. We don't want to change it so it becomes to combersome, but any tweaks that can add depth w/o reaching this point are ok.

Strength considerations: Much like the way momentum is now a factor in damage, relative strength should also be when it comes to blocking and parrying. Currently, a weak scimitar/dagger weild character (maybe archer type) with 9 or less STR has no problems parrying or blocking overhead smash attacks from a 15 str juggernaught wielding a massive 2h hammer. This is kind of unrealistic.

Suggestions..There should be more knockdown effects and glancing blows. Maybe an effect where the receiver is still standing, but is pushed backwards and/or stunned. Also glancing blows that give partial damage.

Also melee combat is a bit too easy, there should be more variables. It's too easy to parry and block. You can be mid swing and you see your opponent will land his blow first, you can instantly hit your defend button and it will work perfectly, no delays. I was just examining this and you can parry so late into your enemy's swing that his weapon graphics will be partially clipping through your head.

Suggestions: There should be a parry/block delay from when you hit button, ranging from maybe 0.1 seconds to 0.5. This should depend on your shield skill (maybe a new parry skill too), and also the encumberence of your weapon/shield. THis would complement my firs suggestion, cuz bigass weapons would parry/block better (reduce chances of glancing blows), but would be slower to wield and take longer to setup a parry. Small weapons would be quicker to use, but not quite as effective at blocking a hulk smash. THis could also be affected by relative str/agi stats. Also parrying later into the enemy's swing (when it's in full force) will increase chances of a partial hit.

Also, I think there could be different attacks. Right now M&B combat is good cuz of it's 1 attack button simplicity, I think its better we don't have to hit different buttons for thrust, swing and overhead attacks, but maybe there could be a non-weapon attack like trip or shoulder slam.

Suggestion: Add one or two of these. Trip being a slower attack where you try and take out opponents legs with a sweeping kick (you can defend it with button, or by jumping/backing out of range), if you miss you give a nice juicy opening for your opponent. AGI could be a prime stat here. Shoulder slam is a quick short range attack where you try and bodycheck the guy with a powerful lunge shoulder first. This would be good for when you are very close and he tries some kind of slow swing or overhead that exposes his chest area. Connecting would knock him down or at least stagger him, missing would throw you off balance for a short time. He can defend by bracing himself (defend button) or backing up (its short range). This should be effected by STR, since again, an 8 str guy slamming into a 15 STR refridgerator isn't going to have the affect of the other way around. Both these attacks could by default be "Q" button or middle mouse button, if you hit it and are looking up, it's shoulder, if looking down, a trip.

Again, I really don't want to see M&B made too cumbersome, but some more depth making it difficult to master but while retaining its basic simplicity would be great.

 

[CptSalty]

Suggestions: Move to suggestions forums.
Thx

 

[Sir Prince]

As /\ said, this should be in the suggestions forum, and I tihnk some of this has been mentioned before, however you have some good points.

 

[Beelzebub]

mb, could a mod pls move it?

 

[Vog]

Hey Mike it's Varg. I bought the game We definitly got the same taste in games.

I really like your ideas, but to complement them, i'd also like to throw an idea I have that goes well with yours.

Strenght increasing the character size - I do hope that the game will end up with a system where the stats affect the fighting system, in a way or another. So with that in, it'll be important to have an idea of the guy in front of you. Strenght increasing size and height equally, to a little degree and with a maximum size/height(to avoid having 10 feet giants). It's also realistic since you'll never see tiny and skinny guys in the strongest man competitions.

 

[Narcissus]

Moved and sorry for the delay ...

Narcissus

 

[Volkier]

WOOOOT! NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK NARC IS BACK !!!.....


Suggestion - make horses not disappear after the rider is killed :

 

[blizzard_beast]

Suggestions: There should be a parry/block delay from when you hit button, ranging from maybe 0.1 seconds to 0.5. This should depend on your shield skill (maybe a new parry skill too), and also the encumberence of your weapon/shield. THis would complement my firs suggestion, cuz bigass weapons would parry/block better (reduce chances of glancing blows), but would be slower to wield and take longer to setup a parry. Small weapons would be quicker to use, but not quite as effective at blocking a hulk smash. THis could also be affected by relative str/agi stats. Also parrying later into the enemy's swing (when it's in full force) will increase chances of a partial hit.

Suggestion: Add one or two of these. Trip being a slower attack where you try and take out opponents legs with a sweeping kick (you can defend it with button, or by jumping/backing out of range), if you miss you give a nice juicy opening for your opponent. AGI could be a prime stat here. Shoulder slam is a quick short range attack where you try and bodycheck the guy with a powerful lunge shoulder first. This would be good for when you are very close and he tries some kind of slow swing or overhead that exposes his chest area. Connecting would knock him down or at least stagger him, missing would throw you off balance for a short time. He can defend by bracing himself (defend button) or backing up (its short range). This should be effected by STR, since again, an 8 str guy slamming into a 15 STR refridgerator isn't going to have the affect of the other way around. Both these attacks could by default be "Q" button or middle mouse button, if you hit it and are looking up, it's shoulder, if looking down, a trip.

Hmm, well to be honest, I don't really like either of those two suggestions.

A sword is an extremely balanced and quick weapon - therefore slowing down the parrys would just be unrealistic. Elaborating on this, I'd like to see melee combat speed increased by a factor of 2.

Polearms - generally the same as above, but considering that they are top heavy weapons (they are still very quick), the melee combat with these should still be faster, but only slightly slower than with a sword.

Viking style axes and swords - generally following the same idea as above, but enormous two handed Viking axes should be quite a bit slower than a polearm.


Regarding kicks and "bodyslams" - I think these too would be unrealistic. Melee combat between infantry on the Medieval battlefield primarily involved slashing with a particular weapon. Even fencing masters of the Medieval period have stated that the best technique for surviving on the battlefield is to hack and slash continuously.

Just my two pence.
bb

 

[Merentha]

Regarding kicks and "bodyslams" - I think these too would be unrealistic. Melee combat between infantry on the Medieval battlefield primarily involved slashing with a particular weapon. Even fencing masters of the Medieval period have stated that the best technique for surviving on the battlefield is to hack and slash continuously.

And I disagree. Melee combat consisted of men with spears ramming them at each other, mostly because the spear is a simpler weapon to make and learn how to use. The concept of the shieldwall in the 5-10th century(admittedly somewhat out of the game's timeframe...) consisted largely of two lines of men shoving each other with shields until there was an opening through which a spear could be forced. Most heavily armored duels actually consists of trips, throws, and locks, with the intent of knocking the other down, then slamming a poignard or the tip of the sword throw a joint. For this reason, swords were often held in a 'halfsword' grip, to increase the accuracy with which they could be stabbed. Slashing does little to nothing against armor, and so while simply hacking left and right would work well against peasants, scouts, or leather, it would be grossly inefficient against mail hauberks, scale, or plate. (go http://higginssword.org/guild/demo/interpretation/armored.html here if you want to see what i mean by a decent example of a lock-throw.) Agincourt was famous for archers knocking dismounted and disoriented knights to the ground and the using a mallet or poignard to finish them. I, therefore, would love to see a good, balanced, and accurate use of shieldbashes, trips, bodyslams, having heavy weapons (mauls) knock men down (even if they block), stamina, and some form of having slashing weapons actually sticking in men, so i cannot wade into a mass of bandits with my sword of war madly clicking the attack button.

ETA: And to stay on topic, yes, i would like to see parries take time to execute. Glancing blows...I am less certain my what the OP meant. Do you mean that a maul would be partially deflected, and so you take some damage? I think this would be more than fullfilled by a knockback or knockdown feature of the maul (and other heavy weapons)

 

[triato]

Ive put this somewhere else cause I had not seen this tred. Sorry

I would sugest a special button, once you press it all your attacks would change but you would still choose which to do with the yellow arrows. The new attacks would have an special preparation so one could recognize it and press the special buton and defence to block it.

For example if you have a glaive, press the special buton and then the attack mouse buton when the arrow is pointing down, you get a short distance upwards swing instead of the normal downwards swing. If you are on the reciving side you would see your enemy puting the glaive edge behind his back and then swing, when he puts the glaive back you know it is the special blow so you press special + defence to block it. Some special blows could be defended by normal defence in the case they come from the same direction but they would have diferent reaching and effects.

I think that would ad variety to the game and would make defending harder and more challendging without making the game over complex. Also it would give alternative attacks to those that dont look good now like the great spear trusting into the guy half meter from you, the special atack would be to hit your oponent with the back part of the lance (still slow cause you have to move all that big lance anyway).

Special button could cover some of the sugestions in the original post. About parry speed, I agree parrying can not be made inmediatly, however parry moves and deflecting moves are allways shorter and therefore generally faster than attacks (your body is closer to you than to him) I would agree to put a delay in twou handed weapons and polearms only, as the original post says the delay should be based on the weapons weight. I have only some experience in empty handed fighting and some staff sparring, if someone here have experience with weapons like the ones on the game please correct me if I am wrong.

About big weapons being stoped with small ones, I think it is true what we have now is unrealistic, however I was thinking...

What would I do if I were a warrior on the reciving side of a war hamer coming down? Side step thats what I would do, however in the game, in RL I know I can sidestep faster that I do when runing, the shortcoming of this movement is that if done continuosly you dont get the speed you do when runing, I don't know if I make myself clear, I am speaking of footwork like the one you see a boxer or martial artist do.

Anyway I would agree with heavy weapons having a porcentage of chance to trow you if your weapon is small or maybe opening your guard a short time for someone else to attack you (heavy weapon holder would not have time to trow another blow before you recover your guard)

 

[triato]

Regarding the last post before mine

I agree there was more than slashing in armored combat and I have seen medieval manuals for trowing and even locks between armed combatants (sorry dont remember where).

I dont have experience on this but I think that an medium or small edge weapon would either penetrate armor with devasting efect, penetrate just a little (less than 2 cm) or be completelly stoped, a slashing attack would have the last two effects (of course a 2 cm deep cut would reach the muscle puting your arm out of combat) and of course would delive great blut damage if it were to hit the head. In gameterms I would not like this to be modelled cause you could die with single hits as in RL, however I think pierce damage should be somewhat stronger.

 

[blizzard_beast]

And I disagree. Melee combat consisted of men with spears ramming them at each other, mostly because the spear is a simpler weapon to make and learn how to use. The concept of the shieldwall in the 5-10th century(admittedly somewhat out of the game's timeframe...) consisted largely of two lines of men shoving each other with shields until there was an opening through which a spear could be forced. Most heavily armored duels actually consists of trips, throws, and locks, with the intent of knocking the other down, then slamming a poignard or the tip of the sword throw a joint. For this reason, swords were often held in a 'halfsword' grip, to increase the accuracy with which they could be stabbed. Slashing does little to nothing against armor, and so while simply hacking left and right would work well against peasants, scouts, or leather, it would be grossly inefficient against mail hauberks, scale, or plate. (go http://higginssword.org/guild/demo/interpretation/armored.html here if you want to see what i mean by a decent example of a lock-throw.) Agincourt was famous for archers knocking dismounted and disoriented knights to the ground and the using a mallet or poignard to finish them. I, therefore, would love to see a good, balanced, and accurate use of shieldbashes, trips, bodyslams, having heavy weapons (mauls) knock men down (even if they block), stamina, and some form of having slashing weapons actually sticking in men, so i cannot wade into a mass of bandits with my sword of war madly clicking the attack button.

And I disagree. The sword was never a primary weapon on the medieval battlefield, and half-swording/throw techniques would be completely useless against more than one foe (and since this game doesn't invlove one on one duels, I don't think it would be wise to implement such techniques). For for these reasons the primary infantry weapon of choice was some type of pole-arm.

When the sword was used on the battlefield, it was almost always against lightly armoured opponents (ie. peasants), as it was the most efficient weapon to perform this task.

When we're talking in terms of pole-arms, these weapons of course could not cut through armour - but you've got to remember the massive amounts of blunt trauma inflicted - breaking bones, and sometimes knocking someone unconscious.

Regarding the last post before mine

I agree there was more than slashing in armored combat and I have seen medieval manuals for trowing and even locks between armed combatants (sorry dont remember where).

I wasn't disagreeing with the fact that there are far more techniques than "hacking and slashing", I just meant to say that locks, throws, and halfsword techniques were not really applicable on the battlefield.

 

[Archonsod]

Strength considerations: Much like the way momentum is now a factor in damage, relative strength should also be when it comes to blocking and parrying.

How about rather than parry completely negating the blow, instead it blocks a portion of damage based on weapon and strength? Possibly have a set amount of damage so strong characters wielding a decent weapon would still block certain attacks fully?

Also melee combat is a bit too easy, there should be more variables. It's too easy to parry and block. You can be mid swing and you see your opponent will land his blow first, you can instantly hit your defend button and it will work perfectly, no delays. I was just examining this and you can parry so late into your enemy's swing that his weapon graphics will be partially clipping through your head.

Rather than a delay, it would be more realistic to have a point of no return. Once you reached a certain point in the swing, then the attack should be locked in. As a side effect, it also overcomes the momentum problem where a hit stops your attack, even if its an overhead blow with a warhammer.

Also, I think there could be different attacks. Right now M&B combat is good cuz of it's 1 attack button simplicity, I think its better we don't have to hit different buttons for thrust, swing and overhead attacks, but maybe there could be a non-weapon attack like trip or shoulder slam.
.

Not too sure about this one. Its a nice idea, but I can't see how it could be implemented without making the combat system overly complex.

 

[Merentha]

And I disagree. The sword was never a primary weapon on the medieval battlefield, and half-swording/throw techniques would be completely useless against more than one foe (and since this game doesn't invlove one on one duels, I don't think it would be wise to implement such techniques). For for these reasons the primary infantry weapon of choice was some type of pole-arm.

The sword was traditionally a sidearm, yes. The polearm was also the weapon of choice because it allows you to keep men at a distance and is much simpler to use effectively than a sword. However, we are not talking about peasant infantry, but a welltrained, skilled knight. A mace or greatsword would have been used by such a person, and IF he chanced to come across another armored dismounted knight, he would have had to try to knock the man over or out. Heavy frankish 14th century knights WOULD use a sword on foot, against lightly armored levies, yes. IF the crossed a knight, they would not slash, but still try to knock the person down. A shove is still a valid technique, and should be implemented.