[Suggestion] Chamber blocking

正在查看此主题的用户

Yey a chamber blocking thread.

Here are some additional 'facts' as I know it, and actually I haven't tested the timing with new animations yet.

But if someone swings at a chamberblock time, they will get the hit in unless the person either holds his strike a half second longer, or does a FAST feint, like not the normal feint most people do but a very spam oriented one. Most people don't feint that fast. If that does happen, you still have time to cancel your chamber block attack and go into a regular block.

So the mechanics of chamber block, it seems like during the chamber animation you have a small collision object on your weapon that has to block the incoming weapon. So the timing is not necessarily on the whiff (thougt works nice when everything is line up) but is actually when the weapons going to hit you. So a big weapon will have a slight different timing then a sword, but if you chamber it late into its hit from the person's side you have to facet he weapon as it comes in and swing so your chamber animation contacts their weapon.

I think at this point when you have a feel for the timing you can safely chamber any single hit from any player. Well I have trouble with overheads since I'll agree there that thrust doesn't line up well with it, and further even if you do stuff the overhead with a thrust it feels easily blockable, not to mention if your weapon doesn't thrust you can't even do it, so I just have given up on chamber blocking overheads.  Anyway so any single hit you can chamberblock, if they hold it or feint it though it is harder. You can chamber block 'regular' feints too as long as that second swing comes at normal timing. But again if they are doing that you just swing to chamber block their first attack and they generally will have to block you.

So all that said, (i hardly play battle) but when I do, I'm afraid to chamber block something unless i'm feeling reckless because there is no point to doing it. If I somehow get into a 20+ second duel with a good player then I would start considering doing it, but in general in battle its better to just block and attack. If it is a new player their defense will crumble. If it is a good player someone will come jump in on either side before you've had time to resolve it.

I don't think you actually can increase the window of time for a chamber block because it uses the chambering animation.  If you try with a warhammer you'll see that you actually have a larger window of time to chamber block stuff, just its so slow so you really have to start it almost at the same time as someone's swing.

I think what it needs is to somehow take away the instant death feel you get when you chamber block. (bold for skimmers to pick out in wall o text). Maybe there should be this current short window of time for it to work, and then around that window of time it heavily reduces the incoming damage you take from the swing.  So if you swing slightly early or slightly late for a chamber, you take 50% damage from the attack. This could sort of simulate that someone tried to riposte but f'ed up so your blow still goes through, but your weapon got fouled up a bit and you didnt strike with the full force you had applied.

This way the chamber block success is still a 'high skill' mechanic, but the penalty for failure is half as less as it used to be, or more, maybe 75%, i dunno.  That might work.
 
I'm not so sure about that idea. Chamber blocking is such a powerful mechanic that I'd be very wary of making it safe and easy to do. I think I'd be perfectly happy with it if the vertical chamber blocking directions were just reversed to the more natural state.
 
Yeah, maybe a slighter damage reduction? I am sort of happy with how they are right now okin but it still seems that most people see them as impossible and impractical, so I dunno if the mechanic should become more user friendly or not.

Also I found thrust block with overhead attack very natural feeling and is in fact how I first learned to chamber block, and I used to think left/right swing blocks were impossible...but that was a patch where thrusts used to 'hang' out there a lot more then they do now.

Overhead block with thrust attack is pretty much an on faith attack the air thing... but I don't think mirroring the attacks on the vertical plane are constant with the 'reverse' swing thing going on with chamber blocking.

Also just keep at it, for a time your brain will feel wrong doing it, but with enough time it'll feel right, and then chamber blocking will become it's own thing in your brain rather then something latched on to your existing manual block area. When I started it felt wrong to do those overheads on thrusts, then later I messed up blocks because I was thinking 'up' for thrusts rather then down, but now it's pretty clear in my brain which one I want to try doing.

It is sort of like in real life here I have my second monitor on my left physically, but in windows I set it to be to the right (weird open gl app problems when secondary monitor is to the left virtually. It's funny now I have problems using people with duel monitor set ups done correctly, it is very natural for me to move the mouse right to get to the left. Our brains are crazy, is the summary :smile:
 
Reapy 说:
Also just keep at it, for a time your brain will feel wrong doing it, but with enough time it'll feel right, and then chamber blocking will become it's own thing in your brain rather then something latched on to your existing manual block area. When I started it felt wrong to do those overheads on thrusts, then later I messed up blocks because I was thinking 'up' for thrusts rather then down, but now it's pretty clear in my brain which one I want to try doing.

See, this is what I don't like about it. Sure, you can ingrain the behavior if you practice it a lot, but it goes against the natural instict derived from the blocking direction. And even after you learn it, it won't allow for the same kind of flexibility in choosing between a parry and a chamber that you get on the horizontals right now. I frequently move first to parry an attack, then make a split-second decision to chamber it instead. Having them both on the same side is what allows me to do this.

Reapy 说:
Yeah, maybe a slighter damage reduction? I am sort of happy with how they are right now okin but it still seems that most people see them as impossible and impractical, so I dunno if the mechanic should become more user friendly or not.

I'm just worried that making it user friendly for less skilled players runs the risk of making it abusable for more skilled ones. Again, it's a very powerful move.
 
Yeah I agree in general. I don't know, maybe if it happens more people predict it more and will block it more. A bunch of people can block chambers no problem, and a good shield user will have their block up after the swing regardless of whether you chamber block them or not, so maybe if it was happening more frequently it would be less powerful as people will become more experienced at dealing with it.

But yeah, I agree that chamber blocks are stronger then we think when they work, and its a bit safer to try them then we think too. This thread just makes me want to go practice with them more. :smile:
 
okiN 说:
I'm not so sure about that idea. Chamber blocking is such a powerful mechanic that I'd be very wary of making it safe and easy to do. I think I'd be perfectly happy with it if the vertical chamber blocking directions were just reversed to the more natural state.

Yes, let's disable all chamber blocks for an entire attack control scheme.  :mad:
 
Disable...? It wouldn't change horizontals, just verticals to match. If you're not happy with that, then maybe you shouldn't be using inverted mouse. :wink:
 
okiN 说:
Disable...? It wouldn't change horizontals, just verticals to match. If you're not happy with that, then maybe you shouldn't be using inverted mouse. :wink:

I suppose it wouldn't be TOO bad if all the chamber-block directions were backwards...

...which doesn't mean you're not a huge **** for suggesting I change my attack input style.  :cry: :cry: :cry:

(I kind of like how different input styles engender different fighting styles)
 
That's crazy. Why not make it 4 logical, and 4 logical inverse? Why gimp both, or indeed either, of the two systems? Both should have a unified layout that matches the attacks.

Jack, you know I was only joking. :razz:
 
Swapping overhead and thrust riposte is unfair and inconsistent.

Here's why:

Issue of Unfairness

Currently there are two types of players, those who use inverse attack direction and those who use non-inverse attack direction.

If you use inverse attack direction:

Opponent overhand attacks you
Block:    move mouse UP and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse UP and LEFT click (intuitive: same direction, different click)

Opponent thrust attacks you
Block:    move mouse DOWN and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse DOWN and LEFT click (intuitive: same direction, different click)

Opponent RIGHT-to-LEFT slashes you
Block:    move mouse LEFT and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse RIGHT and LEFT click (counter-intuitive: opposite direction, different click)

Opponent LEFT-to-RIGHT slashes you
Block:    move mouse RIGHT and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse LEFT and LEFT click (counter-intuitive: opposite direction, different click)


If you use mouse direction:

Opponent overhand attacks you
Block:    move mouse UP and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse DOWN and LEFT click (counter-intuitive: opposite direction, different click)

Opponent thrust attacks you
Block:    move mouse DOWN and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse UP and LEFT click (counter-intuitive: opposite direction, different click)

Opponent RIGHT-to-LEFT slashes you
Block:    move mouse LEFT and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse LEFT and LEFT click (intuitive: same direction, different click)

Opponent LEFT-to-RIGHT slashes you
Block:    move mouse RIGHT and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse RIGHT and LEFT click (intuitive: same direction, different click)



If you change riposte so that thrust ripostes thrust, then this will happen:

If you use inverse attack direction:

Opponent overhand attacks you
Block:    move mouse UP and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse DOWN and LEFT click (counter-intuitive: opposite direction, different click)

Opponent thrust attacks you
Block:    move mouse DOWN and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse UP and LEFT click (counter-intuitive: opposite direction, different click)

Opponent RIGHT-to-LEFT slashes you
Block:    move mouse LEFT and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse RIGHT and LEFT click (counter-intuitive: opposite direction, different click)

Opponent LEFT-to-RIGHT slashes you
Block:    move mouse RIGHT and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse LEFT and LEFT click (counter-intuitive: opposite direction, different click)


If you use mouse direction:

Opponent overhand attacks you
Block:    move mouse UP and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse UP and LEFT click (intuitive: same direction, different click)

Opponent thrust attacks you
Block:    move mouse DOWN and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse DOWN and LEFT click (intuitive: same direction, different click)

Opponent RIGHT-to-LEFT slashes you
Block:    move mouse LEFT and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse LEFT and LEFT click (intuitive: same direction, different click)

Opponent LEFT-to-RIGHT slashes you
Block:    move mouse RIGHT and RIGHT click
Riposte: move mouse RIGHT and LEFT click (intuitive: same direction, different click)



You'd be making riposte easier and more intuitive for people who use mouse direction whilst punishing those who use inverse mouse direction.



Issue of Inconsistency


Right now, one ripostes their enemy by using the opposite attack. That's a general rule. As it happens 50% of those ripostes are counter intuitive whichever attack system you use. Both parties suffer equally!

You guys are proposing to make it the same direction for 2 of the attacks only, but remain opposite direction for the other two. It's inconsistent.

 
CMarshall 说:
Fair point laz, but i think you labeled the data wrong. Totally agree  :wink:

Nah they changed the naming around in .800. Inverse mouse is now mouse and vice versa.

I always used
normal mouse direction
normal mouse direction

Now I need to use
normal mouse direction
inverse mouse direction
 
Furthermore, I protest the renaming of attack directions.

I could write a bloody thesis on why what is now called "inverse" mouse attack is much more intuitive than the other direction and thus should have kept the non-inverse label.

 
I think the idea is that the weapon follows your mouse movement when going into a chambered position.

Before, "inverse mouse movement" meant you moved the mouse away from the attack direction to "wind up", but the moment you clicked the button, the weapon was actually moving in the same direction you moved your mouse, and more often than not you'd move it back into the attack direction when actually releasing the attack (so as to face your opponent, or even speed up the attack).  So really, it wasn't inverse at all, from a certain point of view.

Or maybe someone changed it by accident while completely re-doing the options screen UI
 
Jack_Merchantson 说:
I think the idea is that the weapon follows your mouse movement when going into a chambered position.

Before, "inverse mouse movement" meant you moved the mouse away from the attack direction to "wind up", but the moment you clicked the button, the weapon was actually moving in the same direction you moved your mouse, and more often than not you'd move it back into the attack direction when actually releasing the attack (so as to face your opponent, or even speed up the attack).  So really, it wasn't inverse at all, from a certain point of view.

Or maybe someone changed it by accident while completely re-doing the options screen UI

Yeah previously the swing of the attack followed your mouse movement. Now the chambering action follows your mouse movement.

I've just always thought that the full swing of the weapon is the primary focus of the whole animation, and that it carries more weight in determining what's considered logical or intuitive.


But I guess I'm just a bitter old vet whos copping the rough end of the stick as they change the fundamentals of the game. I'm espeically bitter because I'm one of the few Oceanic players who actually trained to use risposte: I'm a skilled riposter (and modest). And thus I'm the one who'd suffer the most if they changed it.
 
Laszlo: I don't see why you'd want to "level the playing field" by punishing everybody and making both systems internally inconsistent. I think swapping the verticals would probably help everybody in the long run, since even reverse users would surely benefit from having an internally consistent system, even if the directions are initially counter-intuitive. The reversal of chambering directions is completely natural anyway, since it results from the reversal of attack directions. That's just a question of your own, personal choice.
 
后退
顶部 底部