Two weapon fightin? (dual wielding)

Currently viewing this thread:

Urlik said:
rapier17 said:
Any old fool can pick up two weapons and swing them about, but without a bit of weapons training or some natural 'skill'/luck, you're more likely to do a mischief to yourself rather than your opponent, or throw yourself off balance/trip yourself, not to mention peoples natural tendancy to focus upon one hand rather than both.

that is true of using a single weapon.
it never grows old watching someone pick up a sword, swinging it around a bit then trying to do a fancy figure 8 "web of death" and smacking it straight into their nuts.

Hehe yes, you do quite a bit of a swing on weapons, don't you?  At least they found that out soon enough :lol: Fortunately we managed to prevent anyone from swinging weapons around foolishly - its not worth the insurance gamble. Although it is tough to prevent friends picking up your weapons when they're in your house.

the argument seems to be that many believe there is no place in M&B for the use of offhand weapons yet time and again the very situations when it is accepted that it would be appropriate keep cropping up.

everybody who plays M&B has been ambushed by bandits when entering a village or town more than once and the more they play, the more it happens.
why not have sword and dagger as an option for defending yourself against this small number of opponents attacking from different directions in a civilian setting?

if you play an archer then your main weapon is your bow.
why not have sword and dagger as your back up option for when the party gets a bit too intimate?

I've been thinking 'pon this point, and it is one that has merit, both for RL & in-game. The survival instinct of grabbing whatever you can to defend yourself with can't really be replicated in-game, although, I do recall a mechanic from a Half-Life mod I once played. Essentially the mod was a dual-wielding John Woo esque mod, but it had a nifty little thing where if you were out of ammo or reloading, you could hit a 'panic button' and it brought up two tiny pistols. Perhaps if there was a 'panic button' in M&B:WB, the avatar could pull a dagger from their belt in their off-hand if it was empty. If dynamic blocking with shields were in, then you could keep the current 'dagger rules', no blocking except chamber blocks, and still have something with which to attack with whilst defending with the sword. Just a thought I had, probably a rubbish one, but hey.

rapier17 said:
I'd much rather have dynamic shield blocking (like manual blocking but obviously with your shield) and steel bucklers included, as well as a shield bash in Native.

if you have read as much of this thread as you claim, you would know that I suggested that the functionality for offhand weapons can be put in the game (so that modders can then add them in a realistic and balanced way) by adding in full functionality for the shield.

have blocking possible with both the shield and sword and have a shield bash that isn't just the kick with a different animation so it is possible to block or attack with whatever is in either hand.
this would enhance the fight dynamics of native and allow those who want to use a dagger or short sword as an offhand weapon do so through mods without anyone who plays native ever having to see someone using a ballock knife or seax in the offhand.

Just one moment. Let me quote me here, agreeing with you on your method for DWing (and actually being positively for it, which I am...and am not :grin:);

rapier17 said:
Urlik said:
as shown by photographic evidence in NN's post earlier, you can't stab a dagger through an akaton/padded jack.
to deal with padded armour, you need to slash/cut it which is easier with a standard grip (unless you want to get ridiculously close to your opponent)

for implimenting dual wielding, I would reasign the buttons so that the Q key was the default for right hand block and E was the default for left hand block, then have the mouse buttons for left and right attack, left for right hand attack and right for left hand attack as the index finger is dominant and should be used for the main attack.

this would also add the possibility to block with both weapons as well as attack with both.
if the player was using a sword and shield, the right mouse button would be a shield bash
if no weapon was in the left hand then the right button could be used for the kick or maybe a left handed punch
(I know punching would do little to an armoured opponent, but you can already take out armoured opponents in M&B with punches, so it isn't including something that isn't already in the game, even though it is not as realistic as it could be)

I quite like this idea, instead of an easy (read: boring) button mashing dual wield system (see the Berserker class in PiratesVsVikingsVsKnights II) it'd require decent amounts of co-ordination and concentration.
I'm slowly turning towards a potential inclusion of dual wielding, maybe for SP, but not sure about having it in MP. It's a tricky one to balance - too slow/too low damage and no-one will use it, too fast/too high damage and everyone will. Imagine what it'd be like with the current spin-spam way most people fight (including me - sucks when to be competitive you're forced to be gamey).
As for activating the DW, why not have a similar system as we currently do with shields? Roll the mousewheel, your character puts away the shield and draws their second sword or dagger, or axe or whatever. Roll it again they put away the second weapon. Roll it once more they pull out the shield (obviously depending on whether you have a shield/second weapon in your slots).

As for this...

The 2 attacks should be the psycho shower stab (overhead guard to block)... ...the overhead should have a slight longer reach than the thrust.

...what? Errr...right. Ever tried to use a high stab (the high guard was known as prima in Italian rapier fencing) in a bout? It...isn't that effective, unless you're using your own swords guard to push their blade high off target and dropping your own point into their face. Even then its really easy to counter/miss. It's also slower than a standard thrust as its a larger movement and lacks the power that the pelvis gives to a regular thrust/lunge. So far as reach goes, it ends up being more or less the same as a standard thrust.

EDIT: I didn't mention the huge amount of target you open up by lifting your arm high, essentially your rib cage on one side, your gut and also your thigh. It's a do or die guard if you're determined to use it, as you'd have to be really, really fast, both with reactions and how quickly you move the sword & your body to prevent your leg being hamstrung, and when you're concentrating on performing that high attack, its very easy to be distracted from protecting your lower body.

And to quote myself talking about rapiers & my agreement with other posters at the time that it should be available as a modding source;

rapier17 said:
Giacomo de Grassi...his treatise on rapier fencing is fantastic if you prefer cutting to thrusting, or to combine with the work of a later maestro' who taught thrusting (i.e. Rudulfo Capo Ferro).

Anyway, as has been said, dual-wielding should be limited to a civilian context, but I'd still like to see the mechanic available for modders - I'd love to see a Renaissance mod, where you could dual-wield rapiers & daggers/cloaks/bucklers/candlesticks/chairs in the streets/taverns/...anywhere else you might want to do it... but the chances of it happening I think are very slim.
So far as if a control system were implemented for the mechanic, I think where Urlik is coming from is a good basis for it, each weapon controlled by a different button, with a button to hold down to use the weapons for parries.

Now beyond its use for a C15/16 Renaissance mod, or a LoTR mod, or any other fantasy/sci-fi mod, I can't see a use for dual-wielding in M&B. If there was a heavy civilian context involved (i.e. more random attacks in the streets, gang-fights in towns, duels with Lords) then it could be argued that it should be in the game in Native, but even then I don't think it should be without the correct setting (i.e. Renaissance...hmmm particular pattern emerging here).

I do believe having the mechanic available for modifications would be a boon to the modders, without it ruining peoples Native SP games/MP. Thats a good approach in my opinion. If you want it, it can be used in a mod, if you don't, then don't use it in a mod. Or if its in a mod you want to play and you don't want to use it...just don't use dual-wield. And keep it player orientated, not for mobs.

There! My rambling reply.
Admittedly I was thinking of Renaissance mods at the time, but I am fully behind the mechanic being available to modders, with dynamic shield use implemented in to Native. I'm just not 100% for it in Native.

There were a few other posts I made agreeing with you on your idea for implementing DWing, as well as general discussion of wielding two weapons RL, but I thought the above two would do.

So in essence...we do agree Urlik :smile:
 

Urlik

Sergeant Knight
my apologies for forgetting about your earlier posts and my only excuse is that they were an awful long time ago and it is way past my bed time

rapier17 said:
So in essence...we do agree Urlik :smile:

it's late and I'm off to bed so this seems like a happy place to leave this thread
 
No worries, in such a massive thread you're never going to remember who posted what. I only came across those posts because I remembered a suggested DW system and wanted to know who it was who suggested it, and lo! & behold, 'twas yourself.

So yes lets leave that there on that good note :smile:
 

Devil Keyz

Regular
lol @ people saying IRL you can't use two weapons properly.. its funny because usaly if ur right handed ur left hand is usually more powerful..

the fact is dual wielding ISN'T hollywood, its very possible but realistically, would take a long long LONG time to master, people are saying " its not medieval " or whatever but this game has norse armour/weapons and norse where much earlier..

i think :razz:
 

Blackthorn

Squire
Devil Keyz said:
lol @ people saying IRL you can't use two weapons properly.. its funny because usaly if ur right handed ur left hand is usually more powerful..

the fact is dual wielding ISN'T hollywood, its very possible but realistically, would take a long long LONG time to master, people are saying " its not medieval " or whatever but this game has norse armour/weapons and norse where much earlier..

i think :razz:

Actually, I've been wielding swords since I was nine. I'm now 25. Sixteen years of experience, as well as muscles specifically developed to bear shields, swords, maces, etc. etc. means I'm not speaking as 'theory'- I'm speaking reality.
Dual-wielding ISN'T Medieval- NOR is it Norse... this is still because it is IMPRACTICAL. People have this stupid modern assumption that all forms would be equal- it would be down only to personal preference or down to individual skills... but there are some forms that simply DO NOT WORK AS WELL.
No shield- lower defensive capacity, and limited offensive momentum.
No long-arm- limited reach- you have to close on your opponent.
So where is the advantage? You have to close down an opponent with a shield or spear- either they will happily close with you and have the advantage of cover or keep away and have the advantage of reach. In ''all things being equal'' fights, the dual-wielder loses. This is why knights did not ride around with a pair of axes, or maces... it offers no true advantage. It has, however, been dragged around by every fantasist of East and West amidst claims of being 'amazing... but difficult to master', whereas in reality it is 'impractical, and emerged in the West only as a form of personal defence whereupon the main gauche replaced the buckler- and performs an overwhelmingly defensive role'.
 

Urlik

Sergeant Knight
in my experience, using a short sword or falchion in the offhand was not difficult and I found it easy to deal with spears (but then maybe that's just me and my opponents :shrug: )
 

Devil Keyz

Regular
Blackthorn said:
Devil Keyz said:
lol @ people saying IRL you can't use two weapons properly.. its funny because usaly if ur right handed ur left hand is usually more powerful..

the fact is dual wielding ISN'T hollywood, its very possible but realistically, would take a long long LONG time to master, people are saying " its not medieval " or whatever but this game has norse armour/weapons and norse where much earlier..

i think :razz:

Actually, I've been wielding swords since I was nine. I'm now 25. Sixteen years of experience, as well as muscles specifically developed to bear shields, swords, maces, etc. etc. means I'm not speaking as 'theory'- I'm speaking reality.

but thats just you, i've seen people use two swords no sweat. and norse did use two weapons, but the offhand axe was for hookin' things

and yes, if ur right handed ur left hand is usally always stronger - i learned that in boxing.
 

NicotiN

Knight at Arms
Dual is only for fictional purpose.....a nice example is the game Age of Mythology.
There no trop from egyptians, nords or greeks used duel weapon, ony in the add on atlanteans troops used dual.....fictional warriors....and they were called fanatics:smile:) and some myth wepaons used dual.
Another nice example is the spartan warrior, they used a big shield combined with a sword or spear and were the best of their times.
I don't think samurais used duals weapon in battles because in a battle the army with the best combined arms always wins...so archers, spearman, have infantery, light infantery, skirmishers etc. Alexander the great had a nice combined army.
And in game 2 weapons would just be stupid, with a heavy armor no one would wield 2 lighter weapons, they would use a nice big sword or axe:grin:
Not to mention archers and knights, they would just slice dual wielders.
No point for dual wielders since a longer weapon is beter.
Maybe a samurai companion:smile:) but there is absolutley no use for dual wielders, especially since an amry of them is imposibile to train
 

Urlik

Sergeant Knight
Devil Keyz said:
Blackthorn said:
Devil Keyz said:
lol @ people saying IRL you can't use two weapons properly.. its funny because usaly if ur right handed ur left hand is usually more powerful..

the fact is dual wielding ISN'T hollywood, its very possible but realistically, would take a long long LONG time to master, people are saying " its not medieval " or whatever but this game has norse armour/weapons and norse where much earlier..

i think :razz:

Actually, I've been wielding swords since I was nine. I'm now 25. Sixteen years of experience, as well as muscles specifically developed to bear shields, swords, maces, etc. etc. means I'm not speaking as 'theory'- I'm speaking reality.

but thats just you, i've seen people use two swords no sweat. and norse did use two weapons, but the offhand axe was for hookin' things

and yes, if ur right handed ur left hand is usally always stronger - i learned that in boxing.

no, the offhand is often quicker, but not more powerful
that is why a right handed boxer jabs with his left hand and delivers the knockout punches with his right hand

NicotiN said:
Dual is only for fictional purpose.....a nice example is the game Age of Mythology.
There no trop from egyptians, nords or greeks used duel weapon, ony in the add on atlanteans troops used dual.....fictional warriors....and they were called fanatics:smile:) and some myth wepaons used dual.
Another nice example is the spartan warrior, they used a big shield combined with a sword or spear and were the best of their times.
I don't think samurais used duals weapon in battles because in a battle the army with the best combined arms always wins...so archers, spearman, have infantery, light infantery, skirmishers etc. Alexander the great had a nice combined army.
And in game 2 weapons would just be stupid, with a heavy armor no one would wield 2 lighter weapons, they would use a nice big sword or axe:grin:
Not to mention archers and knights, they would just slice dual wielders.
No point for dual wielders since a longer weapon is beter.
Maybe a samurai companion:smile:) but there is absolutley no use for dual wielders, especially since an amry of them is imposibile to train

now read the thread
there were Roman Gladiators who used 2 swords.
in the Icelandic Sagas there are references to the use of short swords and axes being used in the left hand in combination with other weapons in the right.
during the late Medieval/early Renaissance we see systems of sword fighting that use 2 swords, sword and dagger, etc

also, the Medieval archers in England were armed with bows, swords and daggers. I find it likely that once the fighting got to a stage where the archers were no longer being used as missile troops, they would put down their bows and use the sword and dagger (they didn't have shields so they had nothing better to do with their left hands).

offhand weapons have been used throughout history, they are not an invention of fantasy writers. they existed and were used.
 

Blackthorn

Squire
Will people please read things before responding...
Yes- I did say SINGLE WEAPON WORKS BETTER- and NO, that's not just me. Yes, you may have seen people use two weapons. I can do so. BUT IT IS STILL LESS EFFECTIVE. If ALL THINGS ARE EQUAL the dual-wielder will LOSE.

And- "there were Roman Gladiators who used 2 swords.
in the Icelandic Sagas there are references to the use of short swords and axes being used in the left hand in combination with other weapons in the right.
during the late Medieval/early Renaissance we see systems of sword fighting that use 2 swords, sword and dagger, etc"

Roman Gladiators- deliberately given weird+wacky weapon combinations to make the fights last longer and be more likely to end bloodily when they -were- deathbouts (rare). NOT MILITARY
Icelandic Sagas- also claim that wolf-skins turn people into wolves, axes that cut people cleanly in half, and giants and dwarfs. They're not considered amazing primary source material, and were mostly written four hundred years after the events they picture.
Rennaisance Fencing- It's called Florentine- it was a rare form of SELF DEFENCE for civilian gentlemen swordsmen in the age of gunpowder. Main-Gauche was also used, which was essentially a dagger/buckler hybrid. None of these were exposed to military instances, where they would be significantly disadvantages.

Dual-wielding is predominantly myth- people have embroidered rare instances (where people had no other choice, or civilian fencing forms that came at the very end of swordplay) and tried to project them up and down the timeline as a desperate move to make something that seems fantastic to the average layman vaguely historical.

The ONLY good suggestion on this thread is that you might have a dagger on the parry-hand when ambushed in towns/cities by bandits. That has SOME value. Everything else is dross by people who don't want to accept both the historical facts and the spirit of the game- nor physical realities.
 

Urlik

Sergeant Knight
Roman Gladiators were used in battles
in AD69, Otho had 2000 Gladiators in his army (mainly as an act of desperation, but they were used)

you are confusing the Icelandic Sagas with Norse Sagas in general
the Icelandic Sagas focused on history, especially genealogical and family history. They reflect the struggle and conflict that arose within the societies of the second and third generations of Icelandic settlers.

yes there were other sagas that were more for entertainment, but that is like saying that the reference section of a library is all made up because they also have a fiction section.

Florentine wasn't the only form of 2 weapon fighting and the main gauche wasn't the only offhand weapon.
2 weapon systems include paired swords, paired rapiers, paired falchions and also various types of sword paired with daggers.

 
Night Ninja said:
Somewhat relevant, but mostly for amusement value:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD1KBZeZDZs&NR=1

Hehehe ahh the memories of rapier fencing... <sigh> Though I'd have taken a buckler over a dagger.

It never ceases to amuse me that each time someone posts a distorted view of dual wielding and how 'effective' it must have been that we get everything regurgitated once again. From when I first posted in this thread (far back in the 250's area) to now it's been an amusing diversion for me.

I'm still with Urlik on his suggestions. Dynamic shield mechanics in Native that would allow modders to code in dual wielding in mods. Thereby we get a better alternative to the 'lolturtle' use of shields, guilty as charged m'lud, especially if the weapon mechanics are improved to the point that with a dynamic shield block would knock an opponents blade out to the side, thus reducing the recovery time, allowing the shield user to follow up on their attack.
Then modders who wish to have dual wielding in their modifications, whether a fantasy setting or perhaps a Renaissance setting (HINT HINT) - they'd have the freedom to include it.

At least thats how I see it.
 

Wotann

Veteran
Ilex said:
Sure shield is a great protection, but two weapons offer the element of surprise (like a left-handed warrior would). The opponent would have to defend the both sides of his body at the same time.
Btw didin't japanese warriors (samurai,ninja) sometimes use 2 smaller blades instead of a bigger, two handed weapon (which ninjas never used). Correct me if my memories betray me.
The Chinese were the true masters of fighting with two weapons, and they also fought with some amazing weird weapons.
 

Rathmor

Regular
M&B
@Ilex

You're probably thinking about Miyamoto Musashi who fought with a niten'ichi dual sword stance (which was uncommon during his time) using a Katana and Wakizashi. (Among other weapons  :smile:) he's probably one of the most famous and most referenced practitioner of this two sword style.
 

Blackthorn

Squire
Urlik said:
Roman Gladiators were used in battles
in AD69, Otho had 2000 Gladiators in his army (mainly as an act of desperation, but they were used)

you are confusing the Icelandic Sagas with Norse Sagas in general
the Icelandic Sagas focused on history, especially genealogical and family history. They reflect the struggle and conflict that arose within the societies of the second and third generations of Icelandic settlers.

yes there were other sagas that were more for entertainment, but that is like saying that the reference section of a library is all made up because they also have a fiction section.

Florentine wasn't the only form of 2 weapon fighting and the main gauche wasn't the only offhand weapon.
2 weapon systems include paired swords, paired rapiers, paired falchions and also various types of sword paired with daggers.

And in AD69 they were issued standard military gear from depots designed to outfit Auxillaries... because GLADIATORS AREN'T SOLDIERS.

The Icelandic -AND- Norse Sagas have massive historical errors throughout, because, as I say, they were comitted to paper roughly two centuries after the main thrust of their subject matter occured- as such embroidered extra tales have crept in throughout. And yes- most historians accept that when studying them; ask my degree-level lecturer in Saxon, Norse and Icelandic Heroic literature. That was lecture no.1.

These styles all exist post-the primary use of the weapons. None of them appear, for instance, in Talhoffer, when the sword was already waning as a main-field weapon. Site me the sources of dual-wielded falchions. The main gauche was the main offhand weapon of the renaissance fencer; and again, none of this is military application- which I addressed in my post.

The Chinese are also credited with dual-wielding, as are the tribes around South-East Asia... but in reality for warfare the shield/sword / polearm combos reigned supreme. We're also so far beyond medieval Europe that it's untrue- but even here we find these limited examples as far-fetched and rare.

We can continue this mindless back-and-forth, or you could go and research your sources, find specific examples with cited references, and try and form a coherent debate (though it's been done so many times now, it's begining to get depressing).
 

Urlik

Sergeant Knight
and was your lecturer one of those who had to rethink his opinion of the "fanciful" nature of the Sagas when it turned out that some of those Scandinavians had actually reached the coast of the Americas?

using an offhand weapon might not have been the way to arm everyone on a battlefield, but for a hero (and your character in M&B is a hero) there are times when it is appropriate and there are definitely circumstances in M&B where having 2 weapons would be better than 1 single weapon or a hand weapon and shield

a case of falchions is the same as a case of rapiers, only using falchions instead of swords (as you are probably aware, Di Grassi's rapiers were more like swords than modern rapiers)

there is mention of duelling with a case of falchions in several challenges issued in England between Masters of the Noble Science of Defence and also a case of falchions being left in a will.

these are dated in the Renaissance, but it doesn't change the fact that rapier and dagger wasn't the only 2 weapon system.

as for Talhoffer, look at page 240 to see someone holding a dagger behind a buckler and using it to stab an opponent.

so Talhoffer does have offhand weapons.

AND NOW TO THE POINT YOU HAVE MISSED

if you had read everything you would have seen that all I have actually asked for is that the shield bash is incorporated in such a way that it isn't just the kick with a different animation but is dynamic and allows for both the shield and sword to be used to block and also attack, allowing bucklers to be properly used and giving modders the necessary code to add in offhand weapons in a balanced way.

this is something that would enhance native and make combat even more realistic



 

Blackthorn

Squire
No. My lecturer did not, as the Vinland Saga was ALWAYS assumed to have basis in reality. But have you found one-footed beast skeletons in North America yet?

And yes- someone using a knife behind a buckler. So they're using a shield, then? I thought so. Equally the Scots did this. It's to allow a form of counter with the buckler-dagger, it'd called 'passive dagger', not 'dual wielding' where a knife behind the shield is suddenly deployed when unexpected, and is the primitive form of a main gauche. Equally carrying a knife in your left hand whilst gripping a polearm with both isn't dual-wielding, it's having a second weapon prepared for being closed on. When the enemy strikes you release the polearm with the left, steering it to block with the right, and stab down with the dagger. Only the dagger is employed to attack... so it's a weapon SWITCH. Neither of these are 'dual wielding', though I should credit that it's the closest evidence you've managed to muster yet for something approaching the fanciful posts you've made. But still no lack of shields in preference for a second weapon, though...

And you've still failed to provide proof... just baseless theory, especially regarding ''heroes''... which gives most people reading this a pretty good idea of your historical knowledge. There's still no reason to select two weapons. When you're in light armour, a shield allows you better defence. A polearm greater reach, and in better armour, a two-handed weapon allows you to rain heavier blows on your enemy. Two single-handed weapons means you have a moderate attack, relatively poor defence... and that's why it wasn't done.

You've said that Falchions and swords can be freely interchanged with rapiers- without basis... then quoted Falchion duels! There's no question that these happened... just point to the bit where it says there WERE TWO FOR EITHER COMBATANT.

And I'm not discussing your theory on how to implement it in the game- more your splurging historical nonsense, which I assume, without new information, you'll continue to do. Because obviously medieval 'Heroes' all duel-wielded... 
 
Top Bottom