[Suggestions, kinda] A criticising view on 660's new weapons

[Attacksmurfen]

I think a good guideline is to pick a weapon and compared its reach and speed to one of the swords of similar lenght. A sword will always be faster than any other weapon, simply because a sword will typically be balanced to maximize reach while being light. So i.e. the spiked club is clearly way to fast, it should be slowed down a bit. The other option is to change the animations of other weapons so that they cannot be swung like a sword, this should require new animations.

 

[Archonsod]

Not everyone in the game wears a helm, though. We're not discussing whether the attack should be armor-piercing, we're discussing whether it should count as an attack at all. No headgear for Phallas.

Their problem then. Thing is, being hit with the axe haft will hurt, but not as much as the axe head itself. Considering the kind of injuries required to deplete health points in M&B, I don't think slight bruising and a mild concussion really compare.

 

[Magni]

A fully armored Nord, every last piece of top gear, will die in a single swing from a great long axe.  I'm pretty sure since they can spam the swings on that monstrosity so fast that the haft only bumping people won't hurt them terribly.

 

[EdwardWellcraft]

I'm not minding the long weapons as much anymore because of the fact they collide with environment. In the lower levels of the 2-story ruined buildings the great long axe can't be swung at all in axe mode. You have to switch it to polearm and stab to do anything, or so it seemed. I grabbed a shield and 1-handed axe and never got killed by a long weapon while in one of those buildings during a deathmatch round a little bit ago.  Even simply sticking close to a wall prevents the axe from being swung from one direction, significantly reducing it's flexibility.

However, I still despise them, like the warhammers, from an aesthetic standpoint.

 

[Ursca]

Not everyone in the game wears a helm, though. We're not discussing whether the attack should be armor-piercing, we're discussing whether it should count as an attack at all. No headgear for Phallas.

Their problem then. Thing is, being hit with the axe haft will hurt, but not as much as the axe head itself. Considering the kind of injuries required to deplete health points in M&B, I don't think slight bruising and a mild concussion really compare.

Kicking and punching both do damage. Getting hit with the haft of a weapon surely should too, at least as much as a quarterstaff.

 

[Archonsod]

Punching won't do any damage to someone wearing armour. Not sure how much kicking does. Thing is though even a fist is designed to transfer energy to what it hits. A weapon haft on the other hand isn't, it'll bounce off.

 

[Ursca]

Punching won't do any damage to someone wearing armour.

And a quarterstaff does very little damage to anyone wearing armour either.

You seem to be arguing that a haft shouldn't do any damage at all, when clearly it should do at least as much as a quarterstaff or punch. 

 

[Skyrage]

Haft != quarterstaff

 

[Attacksmurfen]

Not everyone in the game wears a helm, though. We're not discussing whether the attack should be armor-piercing, we're discussing whether it should count as an attack at all. No headgear for Phallas.

Their problem then. Thing is, being hit with the axe haft will hurt, but not as much as the axe head itself. Considering the kind of injuries required to deplete health points in M&B, I don't think slight bruising and a mild concussion really compare.

Kicking and punching both do damage. Getting hit with the haft of a weapon surely should too, at least as much as a quarterstaff.

Well, only as long as the shaft moves as fast as the quarterstaff and has the same dimensions etc. But you see, it has a large metal blade on its end so it can't be as fast, and thus your suggestion is only theoretical.
The business end of a polearm is what causes damage, and even so the best way to defeat at least plate armour was to attack the parts that weren't armoured, or to make the enemy fall so you could unleash a full overhead swing on him, Warband style

 

[Night Ninja]

Still, people in Warband often wear minimal armour (or at least the most cost-effective armour). It's far more encumbering than it actually is, and it's often very difficult to replace if someone on the opposing team gets lucky. A weapon haft that hits someone in a gambeson or leather jerkin is going to crack bones and cause severe bruising.

 

[Attacksmurfen]

Indeed, not to forget, the pullback immediately following a "shaft swing" would connect with the blade and rip off tendons, throats, armpits... you get the point
This is extensively used in polearm instruction manuals.

 

[ares007]

Indeed, not to forget, the pullback immediately following a "shaft swing" would connect with the blade and rip off tendons, throats, armpits... you get the point
This is extensively used in polearm instruction manuals.

But that doesn't matter when the guy has a sword down your throat.

A quarter staff will crush bones at the optimal point of contact which is quite close to where an axe head would be. If you move halfway down the haft, then you reducing the quarterstaff damage by at least half. In that case, the cut or [more likely] thrust from a sword is going to be a lot more of an issue.

 

[Night Ninja]

A suboptimal attack is still an attack. Attacks with the spear haft ingame often do rather small amounts of damage when not backed up by ridiculous speed bonuses, but they still cause stagger and knockback.

 

[Phallas]

The point is, If a Sword can bounce of someone then a wooden shaft should also.

The head of an axe is rated to 55 Damage, the rating for an sword swing is 29, the shaft of an axe is making more damage then a Sword swing atm.

 

[Highelfwarrior]

I'd like to remind people that this is still a game, and now that it's multiplayer, certain realim things have to be sacrificed. Sure, getting hit by the wooden part of one of those ridiculously oversized axes or bardiches would hurt IRL, but in-game they shouldn't kill. I'd say just let them do some minor blunt damage and stun - but a stun would result in a kill by the instantanious next swing which is usually the case with 2 handers. I've been killed by them multiple times whilst standing right on of the wielder and slicing, leaving me dead whilst the head passed through and behind me.

Every time I play I notice more and more how these 2 handers are often waaay faster than my 1 hander. Add that to good shield-breaking capability and that the /entire/ wooden part can also kill a player and you've got a situation where a 2 h always wins if he's capable of spamming. One other solution that seems a lot easier to do is to simply lower the speed drastically. If the point is realism, lowering speed very much should be no problem at all. Alternatively, the chamber could take longer for 2 handers whilst keeping a similar swing speed, thus making spamming a lot harder but not making swings look slow paced compared to the rest of the combat speed. A little delay between attacks would be good too, but that'd be pretty much the same thing. Currently it's laughable how you can swing a weapon so heavy with such momentum and recover, chamber and swing again in such a short time.

I think taleworlds introduced the collission with environment thing (along with longer weapons) thinking that would kindof balance it out, but people simply don't take advantage of this, and most fights take place in open areas. It's pretty useless as a tactic overal (except a few ruins, some places in siege areas etc.) I've already literally lured someone with a Great Long Axe to follow me, then I got into a corner all the way to see how well it'd protect me, and I still got killed by a side swing easily.

Another thing I realised is that the great long bardiche/axe and long axe should NOT be used as two handers, but solely as polearms. This was highly likely the way they were used in real battles, if at all. (I know if I was gonna fight in a battle risking my very life I would rather have a shield and something light than a 999 pound axe or similar)

Another thing, today in-game someone asked if these new cleavers were a joke spoof on orcs etc. thus proving again people are ignorant on the fact they are historical. Again, the name "maciejowski cleaver" would've answered his question pretty much, making him know its not a fantasy sword even though he did'nt know about the weapon before.

In short; proposed changes to balance things out but keep the items:

* Great long and long axe&bardiche changed to polearm position only. ( + realism, + balance as they are shorter)
* Less damage from the wooden parts of polearms, long axes and bardiches ( + realism, + balance)
* Either lengthening time to chamber or swing speed of these items might work too if for some reason they will remain 2 handed no matter what.

* Rename the rhodok cleavers to "Maciejowski cleaver" (no more bad fantasy image)
* Scale down the bigger cleavers -- they didn't look that big in the real life references. (+realism + balance)

 

[Archonsod]

You seem to be arguing that a haft shouldn't do any damage at all, when clearly it should do at least as much as a quarterstaff or punch. 

It's not a quarterstaff. It would be more similar to half staff fighting, which was generally a defensive rather than offensive technique, except I doubt you could really use the polearm as an effective weapon in that manner

I'm also against stun. Thinking about the physics the guy wielding the poleaxe has as much chance of losing his weapon as the guy he's hitting has of being stunned; and recovering the weapon back to a ready position if you do retain it wouldn't be quite so easy.

 

[joseph590]

most pikes in history had sheilds  so kept the awl  pikes sheilds

 

[okiN]

Mostly agreed, but:

* Rename the rhodok cleavers to "Maciejowski cleaver" (no more bad fantasy image)

Bad idea. Why include a real-world historical reference for this weapon, and this weapon only? It makes no sense. Just leave it as the Rhodok cleaver, and **** anybody who keeps complaining about "Rhodok-hai" -- they're just betraying their own rampant ignorance.

 

[Sidus Preclarum]

most pikes in history had sheilds

No.

 

[Attacksmurfen]

Indeed, not to forget, the pullback immediately following a "shaft swing" would connect with the blade and rip off tendons, throats, armpits... you get the point
This is extensively used in polearm instruction manuals.

But that doesn't matter when the guy has a sword down your throat.

Yes that is a very valid point hehe.

A quarter staff will crush bones at the optimal point of contact which is quite close to where an axe head would be. If you move halfway down the haft, then you reducing the quarterstaff damage by at least half. In that case, the cut or [more likely] thrust from a sword is going to be a lot more of an issue.

Yes, just behind the head is what I was thinking of, further down a weaker shaft would even risk breaking (this is how i.e. shaolin monks break sticks on eachothers shoulders in demonstrations) and it also puts the wielder in such a position that it's easy to disarm him (this needs to be demonstrated to be understood).