Reduce "Knock Back" affect - perhaps with a skill?

[DarkUnderlord]

Hello, new to the game. Downloaded it yesterday morning. Played it until I hit level 6. Bought it. Kept playing it. This is the first time I've stopped in two days.

Anyway, aside from the hundred and one things I could say about the game that I find great, there's one thing that really annoys me. I'm a solo-ist. No army for me. Ignoring the fact that I now regularly encounter parties of anywhere from 40+ to 100+ bandits and so on at level 38 (which is annoying but not something I want to complain about), I'm stuck on my horse. Why? Because if I'm not charging, I'm dead. While I can charge to my hearts content and take out bandit after bandit, the minute I get off my horse, I'm surrounded (by even just 5 of them) and they keep hitting me and hitting me and hitting me...

... for no damage most of the time. Especially those River Pirates. With the full black armour and Spirited Charger and Sword of War and a 250+ two handed proficiency, they do an awful lot of "no damage". Which is great because it makes them nice fodder, especially when I encounter a group of 20 of them but when something is causing no damage, why does it interrupt my attack? Why can't I glance the blows off my armour?

Worse still. If I get caught in a group and lose my horse, I'm knocked off. Now I'm a tough fighter with that two handed proficiency, yet those bastards surround me and keep hammering away. I can't even get one single attack in at all. My foot speed is pathetically slow (my fault, I'm a horse man) so I can't run away, so they keep attacking me and there's nothing I can do about until they slowly (very slowly) beat me to death. River Pirates!

SUGGESTION #1 - Reduce Knock Back / Attack Interruption: Not every blow should interrupt an attack or cause any "knock back" as it currently does. Especially the blows that deal no damage. Knock back / attack interrupt should be reduced to only blows that cause a decent amount of damage, say about 1/10th the player's hit points. So if you have 88 hit points, an attack has to cause 8 or more damage for the player's attack to be interrupted. That way when I'm surrounded by river pirates, I can do what any good soldier would do. Keep that blade swinging.

SUGGESTION #2 - Add a Reduce Knock Back (Glancing Blow / Glance Blows?) skill: Another thought I had was to throw in another skill which reduces the chance of getting your attack interrupted. Perhaps increasing the damage a blow has to cause before a knock back is caused. So maybe one point in the skill and knock back only occurs when a blow causes 1/11th hit points of damage, two points = 1/12th and so on.

I think these two suggestions will make hand-to-hand melee combat a possibility. No longer will you avoid going in on foot with just your sword and shield against those 5 River Pirates. It also gives the player a skill to toy with so that, should they not like how much they're getting knocked around, they can do something about it. At the moment, the humble dagger seems to be a much more lethal weapon than it perhaps should be.

I'm going to go back playing now.

 

[Spekkio]

I found this too, the faster weapon is ultimatley the best one. Because you can swing and get more hits in faster than your enemy can block/attack you.

 

[Balor]

Btw, yes. When we fought in full plate, but with wooden weapons, sometimes I just failed to notice landed hits, not to mention that they prevented me from attacking in any way. (Cosider them hits for 0 damage ).
Really, how about adding to 'iron flesh' an ability to shrug off (take without interrupting your attack) damages that like Iron flesh * 2. Powerful hits will interrupt your attacks anyway... rather realistic, I'd say.

 

[DominicWhite]

I found this too, the faster weapon is ultimatley the best one. Because you can swing and get more hits in faster than your enemy can block/attack you.

Depends on the situation. In one-on-one, then ability to block and counter faster is important. However, a large, long weapon is great against groups. Slower individual swings, but you're going to do a lot of damage to several enemies if you hit.

Here's my idea - have your strength rating compared against the enemies when you attack and are parried, or you parry an enemy attack (shields should still act same as ever, as they can be damaged).

For every point that your strength is over an enemies, you drop their defence for a tiny fraction of a second when they manage to parry. If you're 1 strength over, then that'll mean approximately nothing. However, if you're 10 strength over them, then they'll be defenceless for a whole second.

That should actually create the feeling of a truly powerful warrior being able to bash through defences, and also put the fear into lightweight players who find themselves on the wrong side of a black knight. Combat would become a lot more tense (and reliant on agility to move out of the way) if that was the case.

 

[Lothar]

hi

i think the way its now is ok!
but i thin it could be good to "quit" the knockback, when you recive 0 damage!
especially annoying when you charge a river pirate with a lance, and he interupts you for 0damage, with a ***** stone.

iam fine with the rest...

 

[Ferox]

I think it is perfect the way it is, and realistic


no change


the simple fact is faster weapons can attack faster... theres nothing wrong with that. If you want to use a two handed great sword in a melee then you have to work with the strengths and weaknesses of your weapon and any weapon your enemy has.

 

[Sappo]

i think it could use some tweaking too.... even 2 enemies in close range to you can keep you from hitting back....

if they are striking off of each other, say one hits... 2 seconds later the other hits, they will always keep you off balance and either defending or being hit.

Have had it happen many times...

And if you get anymore than 3 guys around your horse, you are almost done for... the horse gets hacked up in no time, and then you get pummeled before you can do anything... I guess that is kind of realistic... 3 guys would beat you up pretty quick... But there needs to be some stat for evading/ducking/glancing a blow

 

[SniperGuy]

You can dodge hits if you try hard enough. And if he's going for realism, then five guys against you ARE going to beat you if they surround you. Besides, despite a "glancing blow" if I smack you with a big stick of wood in your metal head, it's gonna throw you off even if it doesn't hurt you.

Although it is HIGHLY annoying.

 

[Whitmire]

Well, if you went up against 5 armed guys, even if you were in a suit of armour, how do you think you'd fare? So far this game has avoided becoming a beat 'em up, and I'd like to keep it that way. If I want to kill 20 guys on foot without a chance of getting hurt, I'll go back to playing Diablo. What's the point of making every game alike? I think one of the strengths of this game is that it's rather realistic and lethal because of that.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Well, if you went up against 5 armed guys, even if you were in a suit of armour, how do you think you'd fare?

If those five guys were peasants, wearing no armour and hitting me with their fists? Pretty well actually. That's my point. I like the fact that if I mess up, my horse gets surrounded and I'm taken down. That's great. If those 5 guys are Dark Hunters or anything like that, I'm all for it. When they're peasants, hitting me for bugger all damage... Why can't I shrug off their blows? Even if it's just the blows that cause ZERO damage?

I don't know personally, but I'd like to think a suit of armour is tough enough that if I punched it, the guy inside wouldn't be all that concerned. Especially a tough, strong warrior who's capable of wielding a pretty nasty sword. Even if you did knock his balance off a bit, it'd be highly unlikely (unrealistic, if you prefer) to interrupt every single attack. Especially as it is now, when even attack's at the height of their momentum are getting interrupted at the last minute.

For example, if my right arm's coming down swinging hard and is only a couple of inches away from your head, I'm not going to suddenly stop swinging and pull the arm back and away just because some guy punched me in the left leg. I believe the current situation is a lot less realistic then you (and a few others here who touted realism) like to think.

 

[Balor]

Completely agree with Underlord (and see my reply above). Right now, it's frustrating and unrealistic.

 

[Muefigilo]

agree with underlord to a point.

1. low energy low inertia attacks shouldn't interupt anyone's actions

2. 3 unarmed peasent could easily take down a knight with a huge sword just by tackling him or pushing him over in the heavy, dead robot's hide he's walking in.

3. despite the low energy, low inertia attacks doing 0 dmg, they might still caus worry to someone without propper mental discipline, so that would be the skill in my mind. Mental focus or something. Would also work even if some dmg was taken. Probably as close to bein a berzerker as one can get in this game.

4. if you would like to make that aspect mor realistic, then to balance it out an additional action "push" or "tackle" or somesuch should be added. I mean, if your horse is surrounded irl they don't hack the poor animal to death they just grab your leg and pull you off.

 

[Whitmire]

Well, if you were wearing armour and wielding a sword, it would take a mad man to approach you without any weapons... But I think I did say "armed" men, not "unarmed peasants". The problem with facing 5 guys is that you're quickly surrounded. That way you can be attacked from where you can't retaliate. Unfortunately, the AI doesn't understand the value of surrounding a lone warrior, but will most often attack in a simple line from the front.

And I agree with the above: as long as there are no alternatives to taking down armoured warriors (wrestling him down and stabbing through the vision slit comes to my mind), there has to be a way for the tin man to be hurt. I don't think it's too much if you get a brief inconvenience when you're hit with a three-foot machete!

I don't know personally, but I'd like to think a suit of armour is tough enough that if I punched it, the guy inside wouldn't be all that concerned.

Nope. Punching an armed guy in a suit of armour is a bad idea. But if you hit him with a baseball bat, he will feel it! Better yet: hit him with a sword or any other weapon with more weight and durability and a smaller point of contact, and he will experience quite a lot of hurt. A solid blow, and he might even suffer a few broken bones without any armour penetration needed. Of course, it all depends on the material the armour is made of: thick padding, a layer of mail covered with plates, and the baseball bat is much less of a threat... Still, considering the (apparent) timeline of the game, very heavy, well crafted armour is hardly topical.

In short: I'm against invulnerable Michelin men.

 

[Balor]

Btw, if you combine this 'knockback fix' with critical strikes, that will solve the situation nicely.
You may shrug off puny hits when surrownded, but it may still lead to death cause some may actually score a critical (more hits - more chance of it). (See my post here: http://taleworlds.com/v-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?t=487)
I'd say when both of them will be implemented, it will stay balanced, but much more realistic.

 

[SniperGuy]

Trust me. I've worn actual medeival helmets before. If you get smacked in the head not only will you feel it, but the entire inside vibrates with the sound. It's quite disconcerting. And even a peasant can swing his fist hard enough to do that. Although if he whacked you in the chest, yeah, you should barely notice it.

 

[Balor]

Well, I've also worn medieval helmets, and got smacked with a bastard sword (that's two-handed sword, btw).
While it's certainly noticeable, it's nothing major.
However, when I got smacked over the head with lesser weapons (like heavy wooden clubs - that should be as hard as a usual sword hit, since the cutting part of the sword damage would be definitely be stopped by the helmet if even it was sharpened), it wasn’t really noticeable, and definitely couldn't magically prevent me from hitting the other guy.
Now if someone would hit my hand... that an other matter. But that's the same as deflecting.

 

[Muefigilo]

What kind of sissies were attacking you, Balor? Helmet or not, a hit to the head with a freaking bastard sword could snap your neck in twade, as some like to say. Weapons for that time period were designed to be heavy and carried a lot of inertia, and your neck is not made to resist a kilo or so moving at 10m/s.

Even if I grant you that the impact itself doesn't directly damage you through the armor, the inertia from the strike itself might knock you over. The people swinging these things are not trying to tap you for points at the fencing match, they are swinging them with the intent of making the weapon enter your body on one side, and exit on the other. Granted it doesn't often work that way, but give me the freedom to color my words, eh?

 

[DarkUnderlord]

I think it's that balance between realism and "fun" that the game needs. At the moment, I don't think it's fun. Even with a high shield skill, your ability to swing even just once when you're being beaten is, honestly, very frustrating and annoying. At the moment I can quite happily take on 50 - 100 men, alone, on horse back just by charging and swinging as I run through. Yet if I boost up my shield skills and want to get off the horse and get in their amongst it, you really are very limited even against only 2 peasants.

The important thing to remember is this would affect both you AND the people you're fighting. So no more low speed horse charges causing 0 damage against the guys you're fighting. Their attacks won't be interrupted like they are currently (and there are plenty of times when I've caused 0 damage during a low-speed circle charge, yet it's enough to knock them, inerrupt their swing and open them up for mine). I think it may actually make the game harder and more balanced. Horse riders won't be so uber and footmen won't be so pathetic when out-numbered.

SUGGESTION #2 - Add a Reduce Knock Back (Glancing Blow / Glance Blows?) skill: Another thought I had was to throw in another skill which reduces the chance of getting your attack interrupted. Perhaps increasing the damage a blow has to cause before a knock back is caused. So maybe one point in the skill and knock back only occurs when a blow causes 1/11th hit points of damage, two points = 1/12th and so on.

I need to alter my suggestion. 1/11th is worse than 1/10th - I got my numbers wrong. Instead, I thought if you still had a skill but at 0, any 0 damage hits knock you off balance / interrupt your attack. At 1, an attack has to cause 1 or more damage before it interrupts your attack. At 2... 2 points damage and so on up until 8 (which apears to be the maximum for any skill? ).

I do think it's something that might be at least worth a try in the next beta release. Just to see how it's received and how well or poorly it actually works and how it affects combat.

 

[Shyhalu]

I think it's that balance between realism and "fun" that the game needs. At the moment, I don't think it's fun.

We think its fun...what makes your opinion matter more than ours??

Besides, not getting surrounded is part of player skill. Try turning normal damage on and watch how fast those 0 hits disappear. Don't complain because the game isn't easy enough.
Your not meant to become a one man army killing machine.

Horses are easily taken down, just put up a shield and stand in front of it...or carry throwing weapons. Doing a 0 damage charge is just a "stunning blow".

If a low speed horse ran into you in real life, would you be able to glance that off without flinching? No. Would you be killed? No. Hurt? Maybe, but in most cases you'd be able to shrug off the damage after the stun.

Adding the ability to ignore blows just makes you that one man army slaughtering everyone.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

I think it's that balance between realism and "fun" that the game needs. At the moment, I don't think it's fun.

We think its fun...what makes your opinion matter more than ours??

A good point but I've had a dig around and there some to be a few people in this thread and some other threads who also don't like the attack interruption occuring all the time and with every blow. Your major complaint seems to be because it'd turn you into a one-man killing machine... Yet you already ARE a one-man killing machine.

Besides, not getting surrounded is part of player skill. Try turning normal damage on and watch how fast those 0 hits disappear.

Damage is on normal (the highest setting) battles are set to the largest they go, AI is on good (the highest setting). I still get hit for 0 damage plenty of times. This is from River Pirates and Peasants but also a few times from Dark Hunters and so on.

Don't complain because the game isn't easy enough.

Not easy enough? Hey, I'm single-handedly taking out groups of 60 - 100 guys on horseback here (my own army - while sort of handy - seems to never amount to anything more than cannon fodder).

My complaint is that I can't do that when I get off the horse. I can run past and slash, dodge arrows and what not fine. But as a level 40, with some good shield skills and with 35 dexterity, the minute I get off that horse, I still can't swing fast enough to take out two guys without constantly being hit and hit and hit, every attack interrupted and eventually being beaten to death by the few hits that do cause damage. A good shield skill is completely useless because the minute you drop it, you can't swing fast enough before someone's hit you again and you have to block.

Your not meant to become a one man army killing machine.

Already am. See above. Are you also really suggesting that a level oh, say 100 warrior in this RPG-type-thing should be able to be taken out by 3 peasants and not even get one lousy swing in? What's the point in "levelling up" at all if it doesn't allow you to take on tougher enemies?

Horses are easily taken down

Their horses. Seemingly not my horse.

If a low speed horse ran into you in real life, would you be able to glance that off without flinching? No. Would you be killed? No. Hurt? Maybe, but in most cases you'd be able to shrug off the damage after the stun.

In real life, if you punched Mike Tyson and hit, you'd cause 0 damage. Do you reckon he'd be able to shrug it off or would your mighty blow for "0 damage" cause him to flinch, get stunned and then allow you enough time to keep on punching him for 0 damage until you eventually get a few 1 - 5 damage hits in and win the fight?

No? Didn't think so.

Adding the ability to ignore blows just makes you that one man army slaughtering everyone.

The thing you're missing is that your opponents can also shrug off blows. You won't be the only one in there not being affected by "0 damage". Your opponents will just as equally be able to shrug off your pathetic attacks as well and keeping fighting back. Gosh darned it, you might even take some damage fighting that lonely peasant.

The frustration is that I already am a one-man killing machine. Hand-to-hand sword fighting with a shield - the one aspect of the game that could really be fun - simply isn't because instead of your character's skill and ability, it relies solely on speed. A high strength player isn't even able to take some of the hits and swing back simply because all their attacks are interrupted.