[suggestion] increase weapon speed of the shortest weapons.

[dejawolf]

played warband today
anyways, i found short axes and maces with lengths of 60-70 to be very hard to use. i think they should be given a weapon speed of 125-135 (depending on what works best), so you could at least look more threathening while you swing your tiny axe wildly through the air.
oh, and this has probably been mentioned a million times before: being able to duck.
it could double as bracing for spears, shield cover, and sweeping sideways you could hamstring horses with axes.

 

[Ronan]

played warband today
anyways, i found short axes and maces with lengths of 60-70 to be very hard to use. i think they should be given a weapon speed of 125-135 (depending on what works best),

Are you kidding me? That's just....no.

 

[Iberon]

With that kind of speed combined with the inevitable lag delay it wouldn't be humanly possible to block with predicted beforehand what way they would attack.

 

[dejawolf]

With that kind of speed combined with the inevitable lag delay it wouldn't be humanly possible to block with predicted beforehand what way they would attack.

block? just keep a distance between the guy with the short weapon. anything, even a short sword is able to outreach the shorter axes.
if the guy with the short axe gets too close, raise your shield, and move towards and past him to get some distance.

 

[Ros]

It already takes almost jedi reflexes to block a scimitar with a slow weapon like a warhammer or a bardiche if you have any ping to speak of. Making weapons that are at best a 1 in 3 chance to block (pick a direction) with a 0 ping is bad.

 

[David.M.F.]

125-135 !!! hahahahaha o/

it's ok but wep as to have a lenght of 12 and not 85

 

[Commodore_Frank]

Maces and axes have their own distinct advantages. They don't need a speed advantage, too.

 

[olo]

olo thinks 125 on a battle axe is madness. especaily with as much damage as it does. shortswords should be faster than axes, and olo knows what a 125 shortsword would do. it would completely and entirely replace every other weapon there is.

125-135 !!! hahahahaha o/

it's ok but wep as to have a lenght of 12 and not 85

this gave olo a dagger idea.

 

[Dudro]

I don't think they really need a speed boost.  Maybe maces, but only by 2-4.

 

[battlefiend1012]

No they're fine as is.

 

[Leto]

olo thinks 125 on a battle axe is madness. especaily with as much damage as it does. shortswords should be faster than axes, and olo knows what a 125 shortsword would do. it would completely and entirely replace every other weapon there is.

125-135 !!! hahahahaha o/

it's ok but wep as to have a lenght of 12 and not 85

this gave olo a dagger idea.

THE BEST IDEA EVER!

 

[Arch3r]

played warband today
anyways, i found short axes and maces with lengths of 60-70 to be very hard to use. i think they should be given a weapon speed of 125-135 (depending on what works best), so you could at least look more threathening while you swing your tiny axe wildly through the air.
oh, and this has probably been mentioned a million times before: being able to duck.
it could double as bracing for spears, shield cover, and sweeping sideways you could hamstring horses with axes.

You make good models though...

 

[Phallas]

It already takes almost jedi reflexes to block a scimitar with a slow weapon like a warhammer or a bardiche if you have any ping to speak of. Making weapons that are at best a 1 in 3 chance to block (pick a direction) with a 0 ping is bad.

Should you be able to block a scimitar with a war hammer?

Anyway The short axes ARE very fast atm.

 

[dejawolf]

125-135 !!! hahahahaha o/

it's ok but wep as to have a lenght of 12 and not 85

i'm not talking about the short sword, i'm talking about those tiny L60 battle axes.
although all swords could use both a cost increase and speed increase. they weren't peasant weapons, like Mount and blade makes you think they are.
arming swords have an average weight of 1.1kg, while longswords weight about 1.5kg. they're well balanced, and swinging aorund a sword of that weight is extremely easy, even for a complete noob. you can try for yourself. find something that weights about the same as one pack of milk, grab it on the middle, and weave it around, as fast and hard as you can.  now compare with the speed you swing with in mount and blade. i can swing a 1.5kg objects around 1 full swing 1.5 times every second, and i got an axe, roughly the size and weight of a real battle axe(not the cartoonish weight that mount and blade gives) it weights about 1.1kg, and that too i can swing around 1.5 times every second. these are full 90 degree swings, with an unbalanced axe woodchopping axe.
this roughly translates to a swing speed in mount&blade of 125-130.

 

[Ros]

125-135 !!! hahahahaha o/

it's ok but wep as to have a lenght of 12 and not 85

i'm not talking about the short sword, i'm talking about those tiny L60 battle axes.
although all swords could use both a cost increase and speed increase. they weren't peasant weapons, like Mount and blade makes you think they are.
arming swords have an average weight of 1.1kg, while longswords weight about 1.5kg. they're well balanced, and swinging aorund a sword of that weight is extremely easy, even for a complete noob. you can try for yourself. find something that weights about the same as one pack of milk, grab it on the middle, and weave it around, as fast and hard as you can.  now compare with the speed you swing with in mount and blade. i can swing a 1.5kg objects around 1 full swing 1.5 times every second, and i got an axe, roughly the size and weight of a real battle axe(not the cartoonish weight that mount and blade gives) it weights about 1.1kg, and that too i can swing around 1.5 times every second. these are full 90 degree swings, with an unbalanced axe woodchopping axe.
this roughly translates to a swing speed in mount&blade of 125-130.

I can guarantee you that if you tried that in a fight you'd get your ass kicked. Swinging as fast as you can back and forth is hardly a good measure of a realistic speed.

 

[dejawolf]

I can guarantee you that if you tried that in a fight you'd get your ass kicked. Swinging as fast as you can back and forth is hardly a good measure of a realistic speed.

of course. thats not my point.

 

[Qwertyman]

From my experience at least, there isnt a weapon in the game that needs more speed-  some weapons wouldnt be hurt from a speed decrease-  but certainly no speed buffs are needed.

all the really short weapons have their own advantages,  the short arming sword for example is allready very fast-  clubs ect have knockdown and blunt damage (peirces armour a tad).

EDIT:  the tiny axes you describe are very strong-  they allow you to use a shield, deal a lot of damage for a 1hander and bring down enemy sheilds VERY quickly-  generaly a very good tactic to use is to bring both a sword and a 1hander axe.  use the axe to destroy thier shield, then use a sword to kill them.