Mount&Blade II: Bannerlord Developer Blog 8 - Engine Power [VIDEO]

</br> Read more at: http://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/9

 

[Andrix]

One-handed swords are more practical nevertheless and the only way to implement that in the game is to make two-handed swords slower or unbalanced. I know some already made unbalanced are but still, for example the bastard sword and the "Two Handed Sword" (claymore) - they have the same speed rating, but they are not the same size and weight. That doesn't make sense at all.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

It does make sense -- twohanders dominate in duels (range + damage), but not in the battlefield as you get noticeable penalties (speed + damage) with shields. If twohanders had a huge speed penalty as well, they'd not be viable anywhere.

 

[Andrix]

I guess so...

 

[vota dc]

Two-handed weapons are supposed to be as fast as or faster than one-handed weapons. You can toss everything you learned about two-handed weapons from games like Skyrim and D&D because it's all nonsense. They're not terribly heavy or unwieldy, or they'd make for poor weapons.

They should be faster because they are heavier.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

My mother always told me i take too long to butter my toast. Guess i should use a cruise liner instead of a butter knife.

 

[Andrix]

Two-handed weapons are supposed to be as fast as or faster than one-handed weapons. You can toss everything you learned about two-handed weapons from games like Skyrim and D&D because it's all nonsense. They're not terribly heavy or unwieldy, or they'd make for poor weapons.

They should be faster because they are heavier.

It is not only about striking with it - it takes time to raise it before striking.

 

[Wynd Fox]

But they're not really much heaver, so probably not much time.

 

[HannesFury]

But they're not really much heaver, so probably not much time.

You're building discussion on the sand castles of several false lines of reasoning.

A weapon like the hand and a half-sword is potentially quicker, not due to more or less mass, but because we assume one is using it with two hands, which results in a significant increase of leverage.

Two-handed weapons are supposed to be as fast as or faster than one-handed weapons. You can toss everything you learned about two-handed weapons from games like Skyrim and D&D because it's all nonsense. They're not terribly heavy or unwieldy, or they'd make for poor weapons.

They should be faster because they are heavier.

Even more obvious than what I just mentioned is the fact that in between two otherwise identical objects, the one heavier than the other will be slower to accelerate to a set velocity, using the same amount of force.

You can try the same effect at home:
Fill a large bucket with air of standard pressure. Throw it around your house.
Now fill it with sand and close the lid. Try and throw your bucket around some more.


One may notice that although proving a valid point, your step mother is now rather quite upset with your idiotic, Internet contrived antics.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

 

[Willhelm]

Of course, the most important is that they take their time and make an amazing game but still. I understood Bannerlord should come out in a year or so, and yet there is almost nothing which would make me want to freeze myself in time while it comes out. I mean, I loved what the last blog showed us but still... more bloodletting!

No they have to make two handed weapons slower. It ruins it for me to play native multiplayer, because 8 out of 10 players just use a big two handed weapon, which swings just as fast as a sword, and kills in one hit. It takes away the fun and the skill. Sword and shield should be the main thing used, not maniacs who all think they're Urak hai berserkers.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

Twohanded spam only works when teams are uncoordinated -- in sieges, for example, circumstances force the defenders to coordinate their archers to a degree, so nobody in their right mind goes on the attacker team without 1h + shield.  Not to mention that the speed bonus you already get is enough to hit a 2h dude while he's swinging.

If anything, shields are currently overpowered because of how hitboxes work.

 

[Willhelm]

Twohanded spam only works when teams are uncoordinated -- in sieges, for example, circumstances force the defenders to coordinate their archers to a degree, so nobody in their right mind goes on the attacker team without 1h + shield.  Not to mention that the speed bonus you already get is enough to hit a 2h dude while he's swinging.

If anything, shields are currently overpowered because of how hitboxes work.

But that majority of multiplayer gameplay is uncoordinated teams, so in that respect 2handers are overpowered and overused, and it takes away from the medieval theme, i know it's fantasy but it's based off the middle medieval period.

 

[SirKnightly]

Twohanded spam only works when teams are uncoordinated -- in sieges, for example, circumstances force the defenders to coordinate their archers to a degree, so nobody in their right mind goes on the attacker team without 1h + shield.  Not to mention that the speed bonus you already get is enough to hit a 2h dude while he's swinging.

If anything, shields are currently overpowered because of how hitboxes work.

I completely agree with you!  Shield hitboxes really need to be improved.  Although two handed swords are a bit overpowered, one of the main things that could use an improvement in combat is the shield hitboxes and, blocking in general(which they said they will fix).

 

[Wynd Fox]

I don't really play multiplayer, but if shields work in that like they do in singleplayer, that's ridiculous. A tiny buckler shouldn't cover your entire front from arrows.

 

[Meevar the Mighty]

But you should be able to cleave arrows out of the sky with your greatsword. That's why in Medieval II: Total War, the Forlorn Hope unit has a flamberge zweihänder. The order of battle should be 2h in front, to protect the shieldmen from projectiles, then turtles to defend the archers, who can't block enemy greatswords when they're using their bows.

On mulitiplayer Warband: players who want to win in battle mode get the best shield they can afford. Even in scrims where only one archer is allowed, it offers better survivability than a greatsword, because you don't have to worry about sidestepping even one arrow in combat, you can just spin around and block it as though it's a melee attack. The fact that people prefer to use a 2h weapon isn't a balance issue.

 

[Andrix]

I do not understand this:" ...The order of battle should be 2h in front, to protect the shieldmen from projectiles...".
Also, two-handers are over powered, since you can easily backstep shielders with it.

 

[Meevar the Mighty]

Not if they understand the game. Backpeddling is slower than walking forward.

 

[Andrix]

I play MB for 3 years (guess I understand the game), and I kill people with backpeddling quite often.

 

[Meevar the Mighty]

They do not understand the game.

 

[Andrix]

Can you explain that?