[Suggestion] "Fix" bastard swords

[Orion]

The bastard/heavy bastard sword is by far the best dueling weapon in this game.

The biggest difference to the spears is the stab. The spear stab uses the polearm animation
and can only be used on range. It is not that easy to land and takes skill.

The bastard sword stab is very fast and works being very close. It's very hard to block a facehug stab
from a bastard sword. Feining and moving like doing a swing and then suddenly switching to stab
is almost everytime a sure hit even against very good blockers when being close.

I refuse to play duel servers anymore if Swadians are in play. This personally disappoints me because my favorite weapon is the Two Handed Sword. I just can't keep up with any of the good duelers using bastard swords because the reach difference is negligible but the speed difference is considerable. Half of the mediocre duelers can't even be beat anymore (not by me, and I don't consider my self a bad duelist at all).

The reason is the speed/reach relationship. One handed swords and their short variants have a nearly uniform pattern. Normal one handed swords have ~99 speed and ~96 reach. Their short variants then have ~103 speed and ~86 reach. You get a difference in speed of ~4 (which to anyone familiar with the weapons is definitely noticeable) and you get a difference in reach of ~9 (the point of "noticeability" in reach is around 9 or 10). This means you get noticeable speed at a noticeable lack of length.

Here's where the bastard swords break the rule. The Heavy Bastard Sword has 97 speed and 105 reach. The Two Handed Sword has 94 speed and 110 reach. Do you see the differences? You get a difference in speed of 3 (which is nearly identical to the normal/short difference), which is noticeable. You only have a difference in reach of 5. The "magic number" for reach difference is about 10.

Do you see?

The Heavy Bastard Sword has a noticeable increase in speed, but an unnoticeable difference in reach from the Two Handed Sword. There's no reason to use the Two Handed Sword anymore because the Heavy Bastard Sword has nearly identical reach but considerably better speed.

If reach + speed = spammability, the Heavy Bastard Sword is King Turd of **** Mountain.

 

[Seawied86]

the Heavy Bastard Sword is King Turd of **** Mountain.

 

[ScientiaExcelsa]

Look, you B sword fans are making great points.  In fact, I agree with all of them.  All of the weapon's features make perfect sense and are quite realistic, but the sword is a monster as a result.  Something has got to go, and I don't care how unintuitive the change is.  This sword one-shots on a regular basis, at nearly every point in the swing.  At the speed with which it is wielded, the slightest mistake fighting it results in death.

I'm the last one to abuse the term, but the bastard sword is absolutely spammable.  It takes five minutes for a newbie to learn how to feint, stab, and they're dangerous.  Put three of them together, swinging wildly, and there's just nothing you can do.  I can't imagine trying to fight them without a shield.

 

[Sarejo]

Look, you B sword fans are making great points.  In fact, I agree with all of them.  All of the weapon's features make perfect sense and are quite realistic, but the sword is a monster as a result.  Something has got to go, and I don't care how unintuitive the change is.  This sword one-shots on a regular basis, at nearly every point in the swing.  At the speed with which it is wielded, the slightest mistake fighting it results in death.

I'm the last one to abuse the term, but the bastard sword is absolutely spammable.  It takes five minutes for a newbie to learn how to feint, stab, and they're dangerous.  Put three of them together, swinging wildly, and there's just nothing you can do.  I can't imagine trying to fight them without a shield.

The change should be intuitive enough to make sense. Orion's idea of the reach I like. Reducing the Bastard Sword reach to 100 and 104 (instead of 101 and 105) and increasing the Two Handed Sword reach to 112 could be a compromise.

Every weapon above 96 speed is spammable. If your argument is the sword should be changed because it's easy for a newbie to start spamming then you should also complain about the spear, or the spiked staff. "But they do low damage!" you will say. If they do low damage and you complain about spam, it doesn't matter how low the damage is, since when you are spammed you need to block to get out of that slashfest of doom. If you block once a Bastard Sword, you can either look at where the next spammy attack will come, or counterattack. If you know you are fighting a spammer, however, you will probably kick if he is in range, or do a fast stab if your weapon stabs. Well, the same thing happens with the spear or that horrific baseball bat.

Changing a weapon's attributes because of it's "spammability" shouldn't be the answer when it applies to several weapons. In that case, do something about "spammability" in general. But don't change only one weapon's attributes, that are mostly fine and make sense, because of a problem that is broader than that.

 

[ScientiaExcelsa]

Let me explain what I mean by "spammable" in contrast with, for example, the scimitar.  With the scimitar, the user has to hug his opponent.  A decent opponent may still take a hit or two, but eventually the attack pattern will belie itself and the opponent will pull off a block and swiftly lay the spammer to rest.  That's if he doesn't just step out of reach.

With the bastard sword, the spammer can not only attack with blinding speed, but stay out of reach.  The bastard sword user can easily control his distance.  On top of this, the spammer has the ability to stab with fatal damage and speed, something other "spammable" weapons can't do so.  (Short swords do it slowly, scimitars can't, spears require perfect distancing)

This is no broad problem, it's restricted to the bastard sword.  There is no penalty for spamming.

 

[HTAPAWASO]

Whenever I can in a duel I use the regular bastard sword or a short sword, because speed is by far the most important factor when facing a good manual blocker (not including the scimitars, as the lack of a stab is crippling and I believe Vaegirs have lower 1h prof. anyway).



However, I don't believe weapons should be balanced around duels.
I think bastard swords are absolutely fine when it comes to battle mode, as they do so little damage for a 2h, and don't have particularly great reach, both of which become very important when in group combat. And they're utterly useless when used with a shield.

I would say the short sword is a far bigger menace - it can be used effectively with a shield, it's short reach is an advantage in many situations (FF, in a building, whatever) and it has devastating speed.




It all comes down to which stats are important depending on what you're doing.
Those huge-ass axes which are so trivially easy to block and beat in a duel situation can be a huge asset in battle mode when people don't necessarily have the time to block every attack, or when shields need a-bustin.
Exact opposite is true of the bastard sword.


EDIT:

Let me explain what I mean by "spammable" in contrast with, for example, the scimitar.  With the scimitar, the user has to hug his opponent.  A decent opponent may still take a hit or two, but eventually the attack pattern will belie itself and the opponent will pull off a block and swiftly lay the spammer to rest.  That's if he doesn't just step out of reach.

With the bastard sword, the spammer can not only attack with blinding speed, but stay out of reach.  The bastard sword user can easily control his distance.  On top of this, the spammer has the ability to stab with fatal damage and speed, something other "spammable" weapons can't do so.  (Short swords do it slowly, scimitars can't, spears require perfect distancing)

This is no broad problem, it's restricted to the bastard sword.  There is no penalty for spamming.

Bastard swords have almost the same length as the scimitar...
In fact I think elite scimitar and regular bastard sword are both 101, no? (could well be wrong).

So why must one "hug" with one weapon and not with the other?

 

[ScientiaExcelsa]

The elite scimitar is hardly spammable.  Neither is the short one, particularly, though I used that one as my example.  Short swords don't do enough damage to be unbalanced.  They're terrible against armored opponents.

Sure, B swords have low damage for a 2Her, but that isn't saying much.  And they're much too fast for their damage.  And they're much too long for both their damage and speed.  They don't excel in any one category, rather they're the perfect mix of all three.  They don't have a single check or balance specific to them.

If you disagree with me, just play against Swadians every chance you get for a while, and I think your mind will be changed.

 

[Urist]

Bastard swords have almost the same length as the scimitar...
In fact I think elite scimitar and regular bastard sword are both 101, no? (could well be wrong).

So why must one "hug" with one weapon and not with the other?

The attack animations are different. 2h side swing animations have the furthest reach, highest speed and one can turn very far
without getting a damage malus. That's different with the 1h animations.
The 2h thrust animation allows those deadly instant face-hug stabs when aiming high and turning in the right moment.

 

[Sarejo]

Well, HTAPAWASO got ahead of me. Both have similar reach. Of course, the animation may affect the reach. The thing is,

With the bastard sword, the spammer can not only attack with blinding speed, but stay out of reach.  The bastard sword user can easily control his distance.  On top of this, the spammer has the ability to stab with fatal damage and speed, something other "spammable" weapons can't do so.  (Short swords do it slowly, scimitars can't, spears require perfect distancing)

Stab is the advantage Bastard Swords have because of being so short for a 2h weapon. And spammers can stay out of reach, but if you hug them or confront them with a longer weapon, then the distance control is now on the longer weapon side. For example, with a glaive , the bastard sword user will have a hard time outreaching it. The Bastard Sword can get another hit in after attacking the first time because of speed diference, but since the distance control is now on the glaive side, it should be no problem just avoiding that hit.

Furthermore, because of the short reach compared to other 2h weapons, shield users can just stay out of reach while they are waiting for an opening (that's what I usually do against B Swords).

In short, longer weapon => distance control, shorter weapon => staying out of reach while preparing. The downside of the Bastard Sword is it's reach, the advantage it has it's being fast.

Edit:

Sure, B swords have low damage for a 2Her, but that isn't saying much.  And they're much too fast for their damage.  And they're much too long for both their damage and speed.  They don't excel in any one category, rather they're the perfect mix of all three.  They don't have a single check or balance specific to them.

If you disagree with me, just play against Swadians every chance you get for a while, and I think your mind will be changed.

They are not too long. They are the shortest 2h weapon with the exception of the Two Handed Morning Star (98 reach). Woops, let me check, I might be wrong . Edit: Indeed, 2h axes are shorter. My mistake.

 

[ScientiaExcelsa]

You can't beat the B sword with a longer weapon.  It's easy for a decent player to block a glaive, or even a long axe.  And in the case of a shorter weapon, staying out of reach isn't going to work.  The guy with the B sword is just going to dance around outside your reach and MAKE you attack first.  Then it's a kick-slash or insta-stab, and you're dead.  In a duel situation, you can beat a B sword with that tactic maybe half the time.  But in a real gameplay situation, you need to get the other guy dead, and fast.  When facing multiple B sword users, the problem compounds.  Their mediocre reach only works in their favor FF-wise.

 

[Sarejo]

You can't beat the B sword with a longer weapon.  It's easy for a decent player to block a glaive, or even a long axe.  And in the case of a shorter weapon, staying out of reach isn't going to work.  The guy with the B sword is just going to dance around outside your reach and MAKE you attack first.  Then it's a kick-slash or insta-stab, and you're dead.  In a duel situation, you can beat a B sword with that tactic maybe half the time.  But in a real gameplay situation, you need to get the other guy dead, and fast.  When facing multiple B sword users, the problem compounds.  Their mediocre reach only works in their favor FF-wise.

Hrmpf. You are assuming a lot. The wielder of the bastard sword right now (in my mind at least) is a newbie that learned to feint, spammer, yet good blocker that takes his time before an attack.

Staying out of reach does work. Or just let the guy hit your shield several times, and slash unpredictably.

But I don't want to get off topic, we shouldn't be discussing anti B Sword tactics, we should be discussing if the Bastard Sword needs to be nerfed. I would (reluctantly) agree of a small reach decrease. Or(exclusive) a price increase. It's a pretty good weapon overall, it would be stubborn on my part denying it, and if you want to use it, well, pay for it.

 

[Kevlar]

I would only agree with #4. I use a two handed sword/great sword anyway. I have never had any problem whatsoever defeating anyone using one of these though, simply block first and run in.

 

[HTAPAWASO]

The elite scimitar is hardly spammable.  Neither is the short one, particularly, though I used that one as my example.  Short swords don't do enough damage to be unbalanced.  They're terrible against armored opponents.

Sure, B swords have low damage for a 2Her, but that isn't saying much.  And they're much too fast for their damage.  And they're much too long for both their damage and speed.  They don't excel in any one category, rather they're the perfect mix of all three.  They don't have a single check or balance specific to them.

If you disagree with me, just play against Swadians every chance you get for a while, and I think your mind will be changed.

I've never seen much successful "spamming" with a bastard sword.

They're just too short for that to be effective.

If you try "spamming" against someone with a 1h + shield, they will just block once, maybe twice, and hit you back (and you won't block that, because you are too busy spamming). The bastard sword is fast, but it's not fast enough to double-swing a half-decent player.
Unlike with, say, the longaxes, where you can often get a few hits in before they close the distance, which is why new players who have no idea how to block can be quite effective with one, since they can kill some people before they get close enough to strike back.

Unless we have a different idea of what "spam" is? I consider it constantly attacking without blocking. If you see it as something else please inform me, because I see the term thrown around so much these days I no longer know what it's supposed to mean.

You can't beat the B sword with a longer weapon.  It's easy for a decent player to block a glaive, or even a long axe.  And in the case of a shorter weapon, staying out of reach isn't going to work.  The guy with the B sword is just going to dance around outside your reach and MAKE you attack first.  Then it's a kick-slash or insta-stab, and you're dead.  In a duel situation, you can beat a B sword with that tactic maybe half the time.  But in a real gameplay situation, you need to get the other guy dead, and fast.  When facing multiple B sword users, the problem compounds.  Their mediocre reach only works in their favor FF-wise.

It's true that in a duel you're unlikely to beat a bastard sword player with a long cumbersome weapon. but in a "real gameplay situation", as you put it, most of the time when people die it's not because they're too slow to block an attack, but because they are hit by two different attacks at once, or two attacks from different sides. Doesn't matter how slow the weapon is in that case.

If everyone in battle was gradually killed in 1-v-1 fights it would take forever, because even against the bastard sword most decent players simply aren't going to be taking many hits.


Which is really another reason not to lower the speed. The fact is, as you point out yourself, a good blocker can so consistently block most weapons in this game, taking away one of the few weapons that is effective against them will just make these players unbeatable unless you mob them, and it will lead to never-ending and extremely dull duels.

 

[Reapy]

I think one problem warband has in general is the difference between weapon stats is too similar. I wouldn't mind the game in general chipping down the effectiveness of the free weapons and teir 1 weapons to be a lot more crappy. As it is now, using a swadia "sword" is just as effective as any of the arming swords.

I think the bastard swords are used in duels so much because they are bastard swords. They aren't quite 1 handers and they aren't quite two handers. You get a little bit of the advantage of both but not quite as effective.

If you try to go inside with a bastard sword vs a 1h sword, you have a speed disadvantage and you will have to work a bit harder then the 1h to keep up the pace. Not as hard as if you were using a two hand/great sword though.

If you try to stay outside and range control a 2h sword or great sword, you will have a hard time. Not so hard as if you had a 1h sword instead.

A guy with a two hand vs your 1h will make you feel helpless on the outside. A guy with a 1h who closes on that great sword will make him feel slow and useless.  When you use a bastard sword, it really does fall right in the middle, and in both situations you are at a disadvantage, but only slightly so, which is what makes it a great weapon, especially for duels.

I don't know if they actually need 'fixing' in the game, or if the idea of a half sword is just bothersome in general? The sword does exactly what it is supposed to do, give you the option to go fast in close or range control out long, but doesn't do it as well as the others.

Maybe a solution is to narrow the gap of the bastard sword so its slightly slower and slightly shorter, or maybe lower the lower end of the weapon tier stats so that in between is slower and shorter.

That would really only be the reason to ditch the bastard. All the above listed reasons have been countered pretty well by others and most of them are independent of the bastard sword and more a problem/feature of all weapons (wrap/ kick slash).

Instant thrust is not a problem, yes it is hard to block when it is right in your face, but if it is right in your face, it does no damage. I have killed several people by accident because I moved into their stab inadvertently and it whiffed off my armor while my side swing worked just fine. Otherwise at the range stab does damage you have the same warning/time as the other animations to block it.  Can you "swing" the thrust at point blank to make it not whiff? I haven't played around with that, is that what you meant by the insta thrust?

Bastard is a nice weapon, I don't have too much trouble facing it, I enjoy using it, but it has its pros and its cons.  But in general I think the weapons could all use a bit of difference in terms of stat growth, many of the weapon differences are so subtle it took me hours of playing to really get a feel for what those differences are since the variance is so low.

 

[AoC]

I think one problem warband has in general is the difference between weapon stats is too similar. I wouldn't mind the game in general chipping down the effectiveness of the free weapons and teir 1 weapons to be a lot more crappy. As it is now, using a swadia "sword" is just as effective as any of the arming swords.

No, just NO. Make every weapon cost, no freebies. Thats proper balance, unlike your half arsed crap idea.

I think the bastard swords are used in duels so much because they are bastard swords. They aren't quite 1 handers and they aren't quite two handers. You get a little bit of the advantage of both but not quite as effective.

? It's one of the most effective dueling weapon. Or even most effective dueling weapon.

If you try to go inside with a bastard sword vs a 1h sword, you have a speed disadvantage and you will have to work a bit harder then the 1h to keep up the pace. Not as hard as if you were using a two hand/great sword though.

Overall shield mechanic is crappy and need a change.

If you try to stay outside and range control a 2h sword or great sword, you will have a hard time. Not so hard as if you had a 1h sword instead.

Not really. Bastard>1h sword. Try it against good player. In fact, 1h swords are weak weapons without the shield.

A guy with a two hand vs your 1h will make you feel helpless on the outside. A guy with a 1h who closes on that great sword will make him feel slow and useless.  When you use a bastard sword, it really does fall right in the middle, and in both situations you are at a disadvantage, but only slightly so, which is what makes it a great weapon, especially for duels.

No. Even at close range bastard>1h.

I don't know if they actually need 'fixing' in the game, or if the idea of a half sword is just bothersome in general? The sword does exactly what it is supposed to do, give you the option to go fast in close or range control out long, but doesn't do it as well as the others.

It do it well.

Maybe a solution is to narrow the gap of the bastard sword so its slightly slower and slightly shorter, or maybe lower the lower end of the weapon tier stats so that in between is slower and shorter.

I would like to decrease hand and a half malus for using it with just 1 hand. Also kick slash need to go, and weights need to be adjusted. And stunning opponent after successful hit need to be decreased slightly. Of course it would be better to change all weapons stats, but it's not going to happen.

That would really only be the reason to ditch the bastard. All the above listed reasons have been countered pretty well by others and most of them are independent of the bastard sword and more a problem/feature of all weapons (wrap/ kick slash).

Animations are problem, and i would change them first.

Instant thrust is not a problem, yes it is hard to block when it is right in your face, but if it is right in your face, it does no damage. I have killed several people by accident because I moved into their stab inadvertently and it whiffed off my armor while my side swing worked just fine. Otherwise at the range stab does damage you have the same warning/time as the other animations to block it.  Can you "swing" the thrust at point blank to make it not whiff? I haven't played around with that, is that what you meant by the insta thrust?

I don't remember but i recall instant thrust from filthy 2h swords users.

Bastard is a nice weapon, I don't have too much trouble facing it, I enjoy using it, but it has its pros and its cons.  But in general I think the weapons could all use a bit of difference in terms of stat growth, many of the weapon differences are so subtle it took me hours of playing to really get a feel for what those differences are since the variance is so low.

It's bit problematic that weapons behave so similar, but current system does not allow "correct" feel of them, so it's better choice than making many weapons crap.

 

[Giledhil]

I think the bastard is fine (except for the kick slash of course). Its stats makes it an excelent duel weapon, but on the battlefield, the importance of range makes the great sword much more efficient, and the loss of speed is at the advantage of classic one-handed swords. IMO, it reflects quite well the reality : bastard swords are multi-purpose weapons, but are less efficient than heavier/lighter swords on certain specific points. For heavy damage, you'll prefer greatswords, and for a 1h+shield fight, classic sword is much better.

 

[gypsydevil]

Fine 'cept Fix kick/slash

Played a 40 player siege last night and the Nords were wiping the floor with swadian infantry blood then melting down their bastard swords for slag....Unfortunately....I was one of those poor bastards.  I saw a lot of swadians running around with bastard swords, and I saw a lot of them die.  While the attacks with the bastard swords were quick....they were blocked, then counter attacked, then repeat that until fail a manual block.

I know people want to fine tune weapons until the end of time in terms of dueling.  But in the actual battle scenarios, bastard swords didn't do much for the swadian cause.

(Note:  The nords weren't even spamming great long axes, most were using shield and that super quick 1h axe they've got.)

 

[ScientiaExcelsa]

Argh, wall of text.  You people are killing me.  I don't have time to answer these today.  I'm sticking to my guns.  B swords need some check or balance.  I can't recall a Swadian team losing since this patch was released.

 

[Reapy]

Having a bad day today aoc?

Weapons getting significantly better due to cost or difficulty in in obtaining them has been a staple of game design for ages.  But anyway making the bottom tier cost money would bring them in line with the other weapons, but you wouldn't have much variety from the top to bottom cost still. Also, there should always be at least one free weapon and armor set.

I think you completely misread my post in regards to what I was trying to say about bastard swords. I didn't mention using a shield anywhere either. I was saying that people pick bastard swords because they fall between the two extremes of swords (long slower range control vs fast short ranged ) and do both roles fairly well.

If you want an example of good players that are somewhat opposite, try to see if you can find gravish to duel with a greatsword, and he will show you how to do range control to perfection, and try to find neih using a swadia 'sword' and he will sneak in hits against your bastard sword that make it feel slow.

As always the practitioner makes a difference in the weapons ability and some people make weapons feel faster then they are when you yourself are using them, but in general I stand by what I originally said. Yes in some situations the bastard is greater then a 1h (with NO shield) because it has range, so you can control the fight via feinting as you move in range, but once you get in close, and the both of you start a swing, and both of you are in good position, and both of you are twisting your mouse to make the hit get their faster, the sword will win every time over a bastard.

Anyway, you sound like you are having a bad day and are somewhat opinionated about how people play the game based on your 2h sword user comment, so this is probably falling on deaf ears.

I hope your day gets better or maybe your temperament in general improves. Feel free to continue insulting me if that helps cheer you up

 

[JoG]

BTW, another thing to consider is that 2h swords are the only decent Swadian 2h weapons. They have neither cutting polearms (glaives, long bardiches, long axes), nor other cutting 2h weapons. Swadians do not have any shield-eating weapons at all, their own shields are not as good as Nordic huscarl ones or Rhodok pavises. 2h and bastard swords are the last resort for Swadian infantry players who can block manually.

Argh, wall of text.  You people are killing me.  I don't have time to answer these today.  I'm sticking to my guns.  B swords need some check or balance.  I can't recall a Swadian team losing since this patch was released.

I've seen this for a plenty of times. At the moment when I joined the battle server yesterday there was a battle between Swadians and Nords and the former were losing like 1-4 or something. But there were only a few people with nicknames I knew there.

I think Swadia mostly wins not because of the weapons, but because of the players. It's not a top secret that many good players prefer this faction. I can say about myself: if I see that the teams are equal, I'll go for Swadia. Why? Because they use SWORDS. It's kinda strange that I say this here, on a gaming forum, but for me it's more than just a weapon.