Amman d Stazia
Master Knight
I assumed it to be parrying....
Two weapon fightin? (dual wielding)
- Thread starter Kniggit
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Master Knight
I did at first, but most of the post seemed to be in correct English, so I wondered if it was a specific type of blade which I was unfamiliar with.
One thing that would be nice about dual-weilding, is that it would be the mechanism which would allow shields to be used to
- bash
- tie down an opponent's weapon whilst making your own attack
The latter issue is one of the primary advantages of a shield (or a secondary weapon). I don't expect to see any change of this magnitude in the current version of the game, however.
One thing that would be nice about dual-weilding, is that it would be the mechanism which would allow shields to be used to
- bash
- tie down an opponent's weapon whilst making your own attack
The latter issue is one of the primary advantages of a shield (or a secondary weapon). I don't expect to see any change of this magnitude in the current version of the game, however.
Jarskull
Recruit
Dual weapons, secondary attacks, etc.
When you scroll the middlewheel down to select the shield, it should be ready to deflect at all times without having to hold down the right mouse button. This would not only make it possible to attack with the right hand while still blocking (which is obviously a reality) but this would also leave open the right mouse button for secondary attacks, like throwing your weapon or thrusting with a suitable throwing weapon. You would be able to stab someone with a javelin, right? You would be able to cock the javiln back and hold up a shield at the same time right?
Further, if you were to apply this to dual weapon wielding, you could use the right mouse button for the right hand and left for the left hand. A simultaneous mouse click would facilitate blocking.
I realize that many people think dual weapons should not be implemented, but M&B has a huge modding community that would like to implement a samurai or spanish light armored firearmed mod. Also, when playing The Last Days I am very annoyed that I can't take one of those huge Rohirim throwing spears and couch it or thrust with it in a pinch.
When you scroll the middlewheel down to select the shield, it should be ready to deflect at all times without having to hold down the right mouse button. This would not only make it possible to attack with the right hand while still blocking (which is obviously a reality) but this would also leave open the right mouse button for secondary attacks, like throwing your weapon or thrusting with a suitable throwing weapon. You would be able to stab someone with a javelin, right? You would be able to cock the javiln back and hold up a shield at the same time right?
Further, if you were to apply this to dual weapon wielding, you could use the right mouse button for the right hand and left for the left hand. A simultaneous mouse click would facilitate blocking.
I realize that many people think dual weapons should not be implemented, but M&B has a huge modding community that would like to implement a samurai or spanish light armored firearmed mod. Also, when playing The Last Days I am very annoyed that I can't take one of those huge Rohirim throwing spears and couch it or thrust with it in a pinch.
Merlkir
interesting idea and I think something like that works in Roma Victor. You would be stuck with autoblock though. Just counting collisions without any intentional blocking wouldn't be enough, I can't imagine how would you cover your legs for instance..
Umm, NO. Drizzt is the bad guy from My Little Pony.HolyWind said:
Damien
Sergeant at Arms
Right. Well, it's also 'common knowledge' in America that colonial Americans all kept rifles, whether for hunting or war, or both.
Of course, common knowledge is quite the opposite of 'actual fact' -- being that most colonial Americans did not even know how to use a gun, nor did they own one, and many had never even -seen- one.
I don't know what is or is not common knowledge in Portugal, so that's all I'm going to say on this --- just because something is 'common knowledge' does not mean it is accurate information. Basing your position on 'common knowledge' is how virtually every myth concerning military history became so widespread. Anything can be common knowledge, regardless of truth.
Damien
Sergeant at Arms
Would I have refrained, indeed?
I'm fairly certain I wouldn't have. My evidence for this is the fact that I did read your other posts. All I saw in those posts was your word that you are correct, and an impressive list of sources, but without any quotes from those sources (meaning, those very sources you posted could completely condradict your position, or simply show that your conclusions drawn from those sources is faulty) to substantiate their merit.
Keep in mind, good sir, I'm not even saying you're wrong. I'm taking no position whatsoever on the particular facts of the issue, as I know I don't have the time necessary right now to get into lengthy debates and source-searching. And if I can't give proper due to the discussion, I won't attempt to engage.
So, all I was saying in my post, and quite clearly if I do say so myself, is that there is an inherent ridiculous to using 'common knowledge' as a supporting statement for any discussion of fact. Again, it was not meant to be taken as me claiming your assertions are wrong, only that the supporting statement of 'common knowledge' is faulty and only undermines your position because most intelligent people understand quite readily how unreliable 'common knowledge' truly is.
Now, carry on.
Feerspoir
Knight
Damien: I used the expression common knowledge in the sense that Portuguese historians have already written extensive articles about it and that it has been proven ages ago, ergo common knowledge for us Portuguese historians, history buffs, etc. (i.e. a fact that is widely known, common in that sense).
Eh, still doesn't work. For a while it was "common knowledge" that swords were 40 lbs.
Feerspoir
Knight
Merentha: bad example. What I am talking about is not some inferred deduction, it is something that comes up in contemporary chronicles, descriptions, etc and has been analysed and proven to be accurate and true.
What all of you are forgetting (I think) is that I presented this example of Portuguese dual wielding in the context of XVth century black Africa and XVIth century India, the Portuguese wouldn't of course use this fighting technique against the Castillians/Spanish or the Magreb Moors.
What all of you are forgetting (I think) is that I presented this example of Portuguese dual wielding in the context of XVth century black Africa and XVIth century India, the Portuguese wouldn't of course use this fighting technique against the Castillians/Spanish or the Magreb Moors.
* Well, how about instead of dual-wielding, allow characters to wield any one-handed weapon as a shield for blocking? 
This way new animations would not be required, and I think it would satisfy a lot of requests in this area. You would use one weapon to attack, the other to defend.
The size and quality of coverage could be determined by Shield skill as normal (though arrows wouldn't get stuck in metal weapons). Perhaps the Shield skill could also be renamed "Blocking", in this case.
One of the NPC's in the "Onin no Ran" mod already uses his scabbard as a shield, for an example.
This way new animations would not be required, and I think it would satisfy a lot of requests in this area. You would use one weapon to attack, the other to defend.
The size and quality of coverage could be determined by Shield skill as normal (though arrows wouldn't get stuck in metal weapons). Perhaps the Shield skill could also be renamed "Blocking", in this case.
One of the NPC's in the "Onin no Ran" mod already uses his scabbard as a shield, for an example.
Damien
Sergeant at Arms
This is the thread that never ends
Yes it goes on and on my friends
Some people, started posting it not knowing what it was
And they'll continue posting it forever just because
This is the thread that never ends
Yes it goes on and on my friends
Some people, started posting it not knowing what it was
And they'll continue posting it forever just because
This is the thread that never ends. . . .
Yes it goes on and on my friends
Some people, started posting it not knowing what it was
And they'll continue posting it forever just because
This is the thread that never ends
Yes it goes on and on my friends
Some people, started posting it not knowing what it was
And they'll continue posting it forever just because
This is the thread that never ends. . . .
Umm....its already moddable....so if you put that in the game you might as well just add dual weilding.N0ught said:* Well, how about instead of dual-wielding, allow characters to wield any one-handed weapon as a shield for blocking?
This way new animations would not be required, and I think it would satisfy a lot of requests in this area. You would use one weapon to attack, the other to defend.
The size and quality of coverage could be determined by Shield skill as normal (though arrows wouldn't get stuck in metal weapons). Perhaps the Shield skill could also be renamed "Blocking", in this case.
One of the NPC's in the "Onin no Ran" mod already uses his scabbard as a shield, for an example.
Tamerlan
Sergeant at Arms
I think there should be ability to deal damage to few enemies in one swing. Lets say you have 3 guys standing in front of you and you swing with sword form right to left. Whats happens then? You cut all 3 guys. Thats major benefit of slicing weapons in real battle. Axe does more damage to armor but it will stuck in first target. So and blunt weapons will stop on first guy. But sword can hit few of them if they standing on line of swing and in range.
Now about dual wield. Take sword in each hand and you can slice in different directions at same time which means you can damage more targets at once. Yes it will make less damage (or no damage at all) to heavy armored units. Yes it will require super agility and no heavy armor for yourself. And yes it will make you unprotected from ranged attacks unless your agility so extremely high that you able to evade or block arrow with weapon. But its so much exciting!!!
Now about dual wield. Take sword in each hand and you can slice in different directions at same time which means you can damage more targets at once. Yes it will make less damage (or no damage at all) to heavy armored units. Yes it will require super agility and no heavy armor for yourself. And yes it will make you unprotected from ranged attacks unless your agility so extremely high that you able to evade or block arrow with weapon. But its so much exciting!!!
All are intensely realistic suggestions, of course. 
I would like to see mount and blade avoid the Dynasty-warriors style combat, where you plow through hundreds of men with ease. In the realism of combat, Mount and Blade is one of the best games, and I would like to keep it that way.
I would like to see mount and blade avoid the Dynasty-warriors style combat, where you plow through hundreds of men with ease. In the realism of combat, Mount and Blade is one of the best games, and I would like to keep it that way. Damien
Sergeant at Arms
No, you cut the first guy and your weapon stops.
What your suggesting could only work against totally unarmoured targets. With such a narrow scope of even possibility -- it isn't worth trying to code it. M&B isn't a bad Kung Fu movie. Let's keep it that way.
Lots of D&Disms. Nothing remotely realistic. No thanks.
And no, it's not exciting. It's silly and in the style of goofy video games. M&B is amazing as it is. I don't want to see it become just another goofy, lame fighting game in the spirit of Dynasty Warriors - as Merentha said.
