NW melee and MM melee : Poll

NW or MM melee?

  • NW

    Votes: 171 45.6%
  • MM

    Votes: 204 54.4%

  • Total voters
    375

Users who are viewing this thread

Well it would be pretty cool if the Upper block could be both the Old MM Meele attack and the newer version of NW. That would be quite intresting
 
Txterminator said:
                                                                4. The upperstab is now a "serious" attack

It's hard to take the upperstab seriously when your whole team is using it as a primary attack. It looks awful to be honest and not terribly historical.
 
Evanovic said:
Txterminator said:
                                                                4. The upperstab is now a "serious" attack

It's hard to take the upperstab seriously when your whole team is using it as a primary attack. It looks awful to be honest and not terribly historical.
the upper head stab was used to finish enemies above you (mostly horseman) but didnt use it against infantry. so its effectivness against infantry is yes, historicallly inaccurate
 
Txterminator said:
I think the NW melee is better , because : 1. Swords aren't OP anymore
                                                                2. It is harder for one guy to takeout 10 people in melee , cuz you have to block the upperstabs
                                                                3. It's more realistic
                                                                4. The upperstab is now a "serious" attack

Thats my personal opinion you dont have to share it .

What moron would constantly raise his bayonet in the air and start lunging around like he had some mental problems? And who could ever take that serious?
Atleast I had utility while trying to whack someone across the face with the butt of the musket - not some unreliable instakill.
 
also that the russians beat the french volti's once using the blunt side of their muskets , they had bayonets but they said the french ddint deserve that we make our bayonets dirty on them
 
Evanovic said:
It's hard to take the upperstab seriously when your whole team is using it as a primary attack. It looks awful to be honest and not terribly historical.

Flynning on the battlefield is not terribly historical (let alone realistic) either.
 
Txterminator said:
I think the NW melee is better , because : 1. Swords aren't OP anymore
                                                                2. It is harder for one guy to takeout 10 people in melee , cuz you have to block the upperstabs
                                                                3. It's more realistic
                                                                4. The upperstab is now a "serious" attack

Thats my personal opinion you dont have to share it .
Have you even played MM?
 
Completenoob said:
Evanovic said:
It's hard to take the upperstab seriously when your whole team is using it as a primary attack. It looks awful to be honest and not terribly historical.

Flynning on the battlefield is not terribly historical (let alone realistic) either.

don't compare bugs to features
 
romandude said:
the upper head stab was used to finish enemies above you (mostly horseman) but didnt use it against infantry. so its effectivness against infantry is yes, historicallly inaccurate
actually, it did(for sure less than downstab), there is enough images shoving its use in the fight against infantry. In some manual upper stab is listed as one of the primary bayonet stabs :wink:
and efficiency should be ~same to down, since it is the also the stab, just different direction :roll:
 
The over-head stab sort of resembles the drill of the early 18th century, when the musket was held at shoulder-height and you would aim for the enemy's throat. It's not exactly unrealistic, it's just obsolete.
 
Bluehawk said:
The over-head stab sort of resembles the drill of the early 18th century, when the musket was held at shoulder-height and you would aim for the enemy's throat. It's not exactly unrealistic, it's just obsolete.

The MM overhead sort of resembles/represents swinging the butt of your musket onto the opponents head. I guess if we go by Bluehawk's logic either one would make sense. That then begs the question as to why one would have changed it for NW for historical reasons at all, particularly because the more 'historically dubious' (the overhead in either case of MM and NW) is a lot more prominent in NW.
 
Bluehawk said:
The over-head stab sort of resembles the drill of the early 18th century, when the musket was held at shoulder-height and you would aim for the enemy's throat. It's not exactly unrealistic, it's just obsolete.
Well, from early 18th to early 19th century musket parameters(height, length) have been changed slightly(?), why then the way of holding 19th cen. musket at shoulder-height and upper stab had become obsolete?
It was used even 100 years after NW, according to this source:
Александр Люггар - Руководство фехтования на штыках
Составлено преподавателем фехтования при Александровском Военном Училище и при Императорском Московском Университете.
Издал В. Березовский, комиссионер военно-учебных заведений, 1905г.

Excerpts from it (translated by GT, not good quality):
Main stabs
All exercises for basic stabs are written by me such that when inflicting the strike, the attacker, to some extent don't face danger himself because, when performing his hit, he cover himself by removing or capturing enemy gun, and thus paralyze its action. Execution of the stabs requires great determination and agility, that acquires with the knowledge and ability to use arms. It goes without saying that in order to achieve all this, it necessary to often exercise in the same reception
I. "first" stab
Before this stab should remove the bayonet of the enemy aside, and then make a double or a simple step forward, at the same time raise the butt of your rifle up (the hand holding it - half straight, gun turns barrel down) and stabbing with motion from up to dow. Stab inflict in the chest (see Fig. 3).

66c20da344e55129824f2c870a97c0ef.png
Simple hits with the transition
Transitional "first stab"

2205d9c4ab258be3d2521f27dc78fe98.png
:wink:
 
lord_olafson said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WvKyIoSttc

The last attack appears to be one used against cavalry, as it follows the 'sabre parry'. And that validates why we've only seen depictions of 'overhead stabs' like that used vs cavalry in artwork and such. Therefore it still doesn't make sense why the Overhead in NW is pretty much the primary attack vs infantry and all classes in general, when historically it appears to be only be properly used vs cavalry.

Most bayonet fighting and bayonet drill I've seen on video has been people using the 'underhand' thrust and generally parrying with the bayonet low down, and I assume this is the case because of the weight of the musket. If you're stabbing up high so often you're going to put yourself off-balance and make youself vulnerable to a low hit. At least in MM we had the lower attack as the primary thing and the logically rarer overhead as a secondary tool.
 
Evanovic said:
lord_olafson said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WvKyIoSttc

The last attack appears to be one used against cavalry, as it follows the 'sabre parry'. And that validates why we've only seen depictions of 'overhead stabs' like that used vs cavalry in artwork and such. Therefore it still doesn't make sense why the Overhead in NW is pretty much the primary attack vs infantry and all classes in general, when historically it appears to be only be properly used vs cavalry.

Most bayonet fighting and bayonet drill I've seen on video has been people using the 'underhand' thrust and generally parrying with the bayonet low down, and I assume this is the case because of the weight of the musket. If you're stabbing up high so often you're going to put yourself off-balance and make youself vulnerable to a low hit. At least in MM we had the lower attack as the primary thing and the logically rarer overhead as a secondary tool.

Ok... lets just make this clear!!

Can or can not the devs force players to use certain attacks against certain opponents... of course they can't.

They can only change the stats, and one might argue that they should change the anti cavalry stab so dramatically that one would only use it as a secondary attck since the attacks weak damage value... but then i ask you what attack would infantry use against cavalry?

Cheers
 
matmannen said:
but then i ask you what attack would infantry use against cavalry?

In the video the last attack is not the only anti-cav attack. At the beginning it shows that the underhand 'thrust' stab is also possible to use against cavalry, you can tell because she says so, if you listen carefully at the beginning.
 
Evanovic said:
matmannen said:
but then i ask you what attack would infantry use against cavalry?

In the video the last attack is not the only anti-cav attack. At the beginning it shows that the underhand 'thrust' stab is also possible to use against cavalry, you can tell because she says so, if you listen carefully at the beginning.

Just because something can be used doesn't make it ideal.

I say screw the redicules bayonette bash...it looks stupid and is outdated, make way for progress.  :razz: :razz:
 
Back
Top Bottom