Rewarding Weapon Proficiency

[Tridec]

When I become more proficient with a weapon, I want to become better at using it, not just faster. I want to be able to outmaneuvre a lesser opponent with my weapon, rather than hacking away faster than him.

So I suggest one or two levels of weapon proficiency at which new weapon skills become available. Moves that would be harder to pull off than the basic attack/block/attack/block neverending loop, but would reward the extensive knowledge of the weapon with greater power over novice opponents.

Something like this:

Melee @ 200 : Basic Counter/Riposte (as suggested in another thread), can be blocked by oponnent as normal, does +50% damage if it hits. To perform, hit attack at exactly the right moment after blocking an attack, say 0.10 to 0.12 seconds after. Opponent must be within range, i.e. if a polearm is used at its full length you can't counter with a scimitar.

Melee @ 300 : Advanced Counter/Riposte. As above, but double damage.

Ranged @ 200 : Fast Shot. When the arrow is released within say 0.05 seconds of maximum accuracy (when the crosshairs first touch), it is launched considerably faster than a normal shot. This gives two benefits. One, you have a better chance of aiming for long range shots, adjustments for gravity and movement of target will be less. Two, you have a small chance of catching a shielded opponent off-guard and hitting him in the head or legs. At about 10-15m distance there would be say a 20% chance that the opponent will fail to block, and it should increase as they get closer, to about 40-50%.

Ranged @ 300 : Faster Shot. As above, but even faster, increasing the range at which opponents will not have time to block head/leg shots.

The key is to keep the use of the special skills rare to pull off, but simple in concept, no extra buttons or combinations required, just a little extra skill and recognition of situations in which a special skill will be beneficial.

 

[Thraundil]

An excellent idea just not the styles of combat though. Attacking an opponent sometimes takes more time than just 0,1 second but I lik the idea.
But a suggestion for ranged bonus: Instead of the opponent fails to block, the arrow will have a fair chance of actually piercing the shield, hit the enemy thought the arm, dealing about 10 damage and forcing him to drop the shield. This will make the crossbow a good weapon against shield-armed opponents as well. As it is now, crossbows can't really be used against shieldarmed folks unless their shields are very poor.

 

[Skeletor9000]

This is a great idea for all ranged weapons. Ranged units can be killed quite easily by shielded foes, so some sort of shield pierce would be great! I disagree with making them drop the shield (which would then be affixed to their arm rather firmly, I imagine), but doing damage THROUGH the shield would really make ranged weapons more balanced and realistic. Giving crossbows/jarids/etc. a bonus to their damage thru shields would make them a more inviting choice as well, since they'd be able to pierce thru the shield better than the shorter bows. You'd probably want to make the longbows pierce thru as well. I think the short bows, though, and the lighter thrown items should have no chance of getting thru. You could maybe tie this to the power draw/throw feat as well. Hell, make some piercing weapons able to pierce thru shields with power thrust too. That'd be cool. For balance, though, you'd have to make some blunt weapons able to bash the shield and damage thru it that way. To balance the cutting weapons, they could do more damage against unshielded/not blocking opponents.

 

[CrushU]

Technically speaking, crossbows fire their bolt at a greater speed than a bow does. So, theoretically, a crossbow bolt could punch through armor, or a shield. (Which, by the way, is one of two reasons crossbows are even used. The second reason is that you just cock it, and you don't have to worry about holding a bowstring back. It's ready to fire.)

Except that shields are generally VERY thick, at least 3 inches. Plate armor, on the other hand, is about 1/2-1 inches thick. I'm not saying this isn't a good idea, I rather think that ranged weapons are pwned by shields too, just that it isn't very realistic.

Cons: Shields are the only way to block a ranged weapon. You don't even need a shield, except for that reason. Any decent swordsman can block blows easily without a shield. But no sword can block an arrow, that's why there are shields. If you make 'shield-piercing' ranged weapons, you take out the reason for a shield. Why bother with one if it wont help?

Pros: Shields are very effective at blocking ranged weapons. The balancing factor is that you can't swing while blocking an arrow, and it takes a moment before you can swing. It IS frustrating to fire arrow after arrow only to make their shield look like a pincushion, especially vs good Shield skill people... This would take that away, at least.

 

[Skeletor9000]

I agree wholeheartedly with all of your comments. I think, though, that this is a case in which gameplay trumps accuracy. I think the piercing effect would also lend usefulness to the shield perk. It could reduce damage to the shield AND to the player. I think your pros and cons tell the story well, since the pros seem to outweigh the cons, at least in my opinion. All these point are moot, however, and the system should work as it currently does if Armagan is going to implement proper hitboxes. I'm not familiar enough with the limitations of the engine to know if that's even possible, though.

 

[Ace]

Plate armor, on the other hand, is about 1/2-1 inches thick.

Maybe on certain parts of a Sherman tank, but not in any suits of plate armor that I've seen.

 

[CrushU]

Tank armor is REALLY goddamn thick. Like 6 inches, I think. And not just a simple slab of metal either.

Im not sure of the exact thickness of plate armor, just that shields are alot thicker.

 

[Ingolifs]

Plate armour isn't that thick i've heard. I hear it's barely a centimetre thick.

 

[Kamamura]

Centimeter? Are you crazy?

I saw some armor replicas, most were done with 2 milimeter plates. Centimeter plates would be impossible to wear, I assure you.

Also, there were two types of armor - battle and tournament armor (for knights)

Tournament armors were heavier, more cumbersome, assuring greater safety of the participants (after all, gory casualties were not the point of tournaments).

Battle armors were lighter, emphasizing mibility. A knight who fell of the horse had to be able to stand and fight on foot.

 

[dorni]

I'd like to just be able to hit where I aimed.

I'm 280 archery, I'm 4 meters away from a guy on a horse holding a sheild...I aim at his foot or the horse's eye, I'd like to hit it, rather than the centre of the little sheild he's holding.

Once he lowers the sheild, I can hit whatever I'm aiming at...his chest, his forehead, his knee.

 

[okiN]

Shields offer full frontal protection because since it's hard to let you effectively control where you're holding the shield, archers would otherwise be gods of the battlefield.

 

[Worbah]

If you could control the shields better, or if somekind of crouch/brace for impact, command was added, you shouldn't be able to block a shot aimed at your toes with your shield. Also I'd like some kind of tower shields. Currently the only variable is durability, why not add size and using speed? Lifting the huge steelshield to block an arrow aimed at your head must be slower than doing the same with a wooden/nomad shield.

 

[okiN]

Indeed, that would rock, and IIRC there was talk about this a while back, but it'd be pretty hard to implement. If armagan got it to work, though, I'd love to see tower shields for infantry to hide behind (Roman scutata! ö/). It'd be great if you could have your troops form a shield wall to protect each other. In theory, it'd even be possible to form a testudo, but that would probably be impossible to program. Light infantry, on the other hand, would use small, round wooden shields, sacrificing protection for the sake of mobility and reaction speed, whereas knights would choose the middle ground and use kite shields.

 

[Ace]

Part of the beauty and appeal of this game is its elegant yet simple combat system. If I want to protect myself, I raise my shield. I’m willing to accept the abstraction that my character is moving the shield to protect whatever needs protecting, even though it is not shown in the animation.

If you complicate the combat system unnecessarily, I think the game will lose a lot of its appeal. I would hate having to use buttons or a mouse to manually position my shield, especially if I’m trying to do this while simultaneously trying to control my horse and keep a look out for bad guys.

K.I.S.S.

 

[Joe Mama]

I do think that the shield should be effective against ranged weapons, but some sort of a chance of a hit, perhaps based on ranged weapons skill, would be welcome. It seems unlikely that someone with a small shield would be able to block every arrow, or whatever, fired at them.

Piercing damage to the arm that holds the shield is also a reasonable option. Enough hits or powerful enough hits could cause the dropping of a shield.