Weapons that do multiple kinds of damage.

[DashRendar888]

Salve brothers! I was wondering if any of you thought some of the weapons in Warband lacked the verisitliy of their real life counterparts? Maybe this should change in Bannerlord? For instance, in Warband, the Iron War Axe has a cutting side and a spiked side, but it only does cutting damage? Wouldn’t it be cool if you could switch between the spiked side and the cutting axe side, thus switching between piercing and cutting damage. Maybe it could lead to balance issues? Perhaps that’s why we don’t have halberds, since some halberd designs could cause cutting, blunt, and piercing damage...

Not sure if this subject has already been discussed, I play Warband on PS4, but I plan on playing Babnerlord vicariously through guys on YouTube, which is how I currently play mods

 

[kalarhan]

Salve brothers! I was wondering if any of you thought some of the weapons in Warband lacked the verisitliy of their real life counterparts?

some weapons in Warband have a dual mode and you can switch between them.

["long_axe",         "Long Axe", [("long_axe_a",0)], itp_type_polearm|itp_two_handed|itp_primary|itp_bonus_against_shield|itp_wooden_parry|itp_next_item_as_melee|itp_unbalanced|itp_merchandise,itc_staff|itcf_carry_axe_back,
 390 , weight(4.75)|difficulty(10)|spd_rtng(93) | weapon_length(120)|swing_damage(46 , cut) | thrust_damage(19 ,  blunt),imodbits_axe ],
["long_axe_alt",         "Long Axe", [("long_axe_a",0)],itp_type_two_handed_wpn|itp_two_handed|itp_primary|itp_bonus_against_shield|itp_wooden_parry|itp_unbalanced, itc_nodachi|itcf_carry_axe_back,
 390 , weight(4.75)|difficulty(10)|spd_rtng(88) | weapon_length(120)|swing_damage(46 , cut) | thrust_damage(0 ,  pierce),imodbits_axe ],

first mode has a thrust attack that does blunt. Second mode has no thrust and works in a different way (animations).

So the question is how many weapons in Bannerlord will apply this kind of system like swords and half-swording, or the classic javelins/small spears.

 

[Phalnax811]

Salve brothers! I was wondering if any of you thought some of the weapons in Warband lacked the verisitliy of their real life counterparts? Maybe this should change in Bannerlord? For instance, in Warband, the Iron War Axe has a cutting side and a spiked side, but it only does cutting damage? Wouldn’t it be cool if you could switch between the spiked side and the cutting axe side, thus switching between piercing and cutting damage. Maybe it could lead to balance issues? Perhaps that’s why we don’t have halberds, since some halberd designs could cause cutting, blunt, and piercing damage...

Not sure if this subject has already been discussed, I play Warband on PS4, but I plan on playing Babnerlord vicariously through guys on YouTube, which is how I currently play mods

You don't plan on playing Bannerlord on the PC??? You should get a PC. I plan to upgrade my laptop for Bannerlord (or sooner if the game takes more years...)

 

[DashRendar888]

Salve brothers! I was wondering if any of you thought some of the weapons in Warband lacked the verisitliy of their real life counterparts? Maybe this should change in Bannerlord? For instance, in Warband, the Iron War Axe has a cutting side and a spiked side, but it only does cutting damage? Wouldn’t it be cool if you could switch between the spiked side and the cutting axe side, thus switching between piercing and cutting damage. Maybe it could lead to balance issues? Perhaps that’s why we don’t have halberds, since some halberd designs could cause cutting, blunt, and piercing damage...

Not sure if this subject has already been discussed, I play Warband on PS4, but I plan on playing Babnerlord vicariously through guys on YouTube, which is how I currently play mods

You don't plan on playing Bannerlord on the PC??? You should get a PC. I plan to upgrade my laptop for Bannerlord (or sooner if the game takes more years...)

I don’t have a computer, writting this via a hand me down iPad some day! I gotta put food on the table before I can buy a computer 

 

[lolbash]

For instance, in Warband, the Iron War Axe has a cutting side and a spiked side, but it only does cutting damage? Wouldn’t it be cool if you could switch between the spiked side and the cutting axe side, thus switching between piercing and cutting damage. Maybe it could lead to balance issues?

This is not a balance issue, but a gameplay issue.

If there is a weapon that can do 30 cutting damage and 12 piercing damage if you press mode switch, then no one would switch mode because it is not worth wasting precious seconds required in competitive duels and melee fights for a very slight armor piercing property. There is no point. If such a feature is implemented it requires it to be seamless and easy to transition, which is not possible in a game like Mount and Blade unless there is a sort of "Smart" System that can automatically detect and determine which types of moveset to use when attack, but that brings its own set of problems that would be very disliked by the competitive community, which is inconsistent damage because of the Smart System, and the very real chance that false positives can occur such as lose you a kill because it switched to piercing while you attack a naked man because an armored opponent appeared next to him.

A very popular suggestion to fix this problem would be to

"Nerf cutting damage so piercing can pierce armor, like real life!"

Which brings up the same problem as the "two different types of arrows for bows" problem we have had one week ago.

This is a point where fun>realism has presence. If you have the choice between being able to kill everyone or only being allowed to lill a select half of people, them people always pick the first option, as limiting your targets is a stupid choice in a competitive play and renders many equipment useless.

 

[DashRendar888]

For instance, in Warband, the Iron War Axe has a cutting side and a spiked side, but it only does cutting damage? Wouldn’t it be cool if you could switch between the spiked side and the cutting axe side, thus switching between piercing and cutting damage. Maybe it could lead to balance issues?

This is not a balance issue, but a gameplay issue.

If there is a weapon that can do 30 cutting damage and 12 piercing damage if you press mode switch, then no one would switch mode because it is not worth wasting precious seconds required in competitive duels and melee fights for a very slight armor piercing property. There is no point. If such a feature is implemented it requires it to be seamless and easy to transition, which is not possible in a game like Mount and Blade unless there is a sort of "Smart" System that can automatically detect and determine which types of moveset to use when attack, but that brings its own set of problems that would be very disliked by the competitive community, which is inconsistent damage because of the Smart System, and the very real chance that false positives can occur such as lose you a kill because it switched to piercing while you attack a naked man because an armored opponent appeared next to him.

A very popular suggestion to fix this problem would be to

"Nerf cutting damage so piercing can pierce armor, like real life!"

Which brings up the same problem as the "two different types of arrows for bows" problem we have had one week ago.

This is a point where fun>realism has presence. If you have the choice between being able to kill everyone or only being allowed to lill a select half of people, them people always pick the first option, as limiting your targets is a stupid choice in a competitive play and renders many equipment useless.

I see, it could lead to gameplay issues Definitely want Fun > Realism, makes sense... I still want a halberd though

 

[coo_snake]

The switch doesn't have to be slow and could be easily seamless. Provided you get really good hit feedback (visuals/sounds) to indicate the difference between using one stance or the other I think the fun factor creates itself there.
The damage bonus wouldn't have to be massive for people to use that. But any damage would be good to have for someone who likes to maximize (perhaps resulting in one less hit to kill).


Who doesn't want to switch to a heavier two handed stance to finish off an opponent in a cool 1v1 situation? I can imagine cool situations from that feature.

 

[lolbash]

The switch doesn't have to be slow and could be easily seamless. Provided you get really good hit feedback (visuals/sounds) to indicate the difference

How?

Visuals are not the problem. The act of physically lifting a finger in the real world to have to press the X button on the keyboard, which renders one finger useless, while having to wait for the animation to switch guards is easily enough time that the opponent can use to land a strike on you is enough for many players to not use it.

The only way I can see to fix this issue is to either, rebind the switch control to a different key, like a thumb button on many gaming mouses, or have the animation be instant to lessen the impact of switching guards. But even then those bring their own set of problems. For example, not all players have gaming mouses, so this will hinder many players that do not have gaming mouses, and instant animations is prome to abuse as spamming the X button can lead to visual glitches that the community would not like.

That is, unless you can think of a better idea.

 

[samoht]

The switch doesn't have to be slow and could be easily seamless. Provided you get really good hit feedback (visuals/sounds) to indicate the difference

How?

Visuals are not the problem. The act of physically lifting a finger in the real world to have to press the X button on the keyboard, which renders one finger useless, while having to wait for the animation to switch guards is easily enough time that the opponent can use to land a strike on you is enough for many players to not use it.

Only if that player is a turd.

It takes about a tenth of a second to visually determine if a character is well armored or not. Takes about another tenth of a second to hit the x button. In real life it takes less than a second to switch your grip on a weapon or tool, so there is no reason the animation should be of detrimental length, and that's assuming an obvious animation is even necessary.  Unless your opponent is the Flash you should be able to do that all before your opponent is anywhere even remotely close to you. And if you are in melee already, switching grip/stance after causing them to flinch from a hit or block would give you plenty of opening.

Arguing something like that is prohibitive is like arguing right clicking on the mouse and the shield raising animation take too long so why bother trying to block.

 

[Honved]

Many weapons in original M&B had more than one type of damage.  If you slash, you get cutting damage, if you thrust, it pierces.  At least one club had a metal spike: blunt or pierce.  Sadly, the halberds only had one.

 

[lolbash]

Takes about another tenth of a second to hit the x button. In real life it takes less than a second to switch your grip on a weapon or tool, so there is no reason the animation should be of detrimental length, and that's assuming an obvious animation is even necessary.

This is wrong. For reference here is a picture of a standard keyboard layout

and another reference, I will be using, which is the average human reaction time

https://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/statistics

which is .284 of a second.


I find it hard to believe you can lift a finger off a WASD key and press the X button in under a tenth of a second. That is half of the human reaction time. I say a much more fairer estimate is 200ms, but even that is pushing the limits.

Not only that, have you ever actually looked at the animation of guard switching? In Warband switch a long axe mode from polearm to two handed is not a tenth of a second. It is infact most likely at around the 500-700 ms range. This combined with the real life finger movement can amount to a lengthy 900 ms, or 1 whole second of wasted time that could have been spent attacking your opponent. This will get you killed in a real fight.

In real life it takes less than a second to switch your grip on a weapon or tool, so there is no reason the animation should be of detrimental length,

Yes there is. If you make the animation extremly fast and unreactable, you can easily abuse this system to screw the animations and make the animations unreadable, which would essentially replace the current Warband feinting with an even worse alternative.

This is also not to mention that Bannerlord is a video game, and fun>realism should be the main priority. Do you want a realistic but barely active Multiplayer, or a balanced Multiplayer game?

 

[samoht]

I find it hard to believe you can lift a finger off a WASD key and press the X button in under a tenth of a second. That is half of the human reaction time. I say a much more fairer estimate is 200ms, but even that is pushing the limits.

Not only that, have you ever actually looked at the animation of guard switching? In Warband switch a long axe mode from polearm to two handed is not a tenth of a second. It is infact most likely at around the 500-700 ms range. This combined with the real life finger movement can amount to a lengthy 900 ms, or 1 whole second of wasted time that could have been spent attacking your opponent. This will get you killed in a real fight.

In real life it takes less than a second to switch your grip on a weapon or tool, so there is no reason the animation should be of detrimental length,

Yes there is. If you make the animation extremly fast and unreactable, you can easily abuse this system to screw the animations and make the animations unreadable, which would essentially replace the current Warband feinting with an even worse alternative.

This is also not to mention that Bannerlord is a video game, and fun>realism should be the main priority. Do you want a realistic but barely active Multiplayer, or a balanced Multiplayer game?

I really like that website.  I did the test and my reaction time was 190ms.

The point stands that any player worth their salt will either switch stances when the enemy is far off and they have plenty of time to react to what sort of equipment they'll be going up against, or they can always switch when they have their opponent flinching.  Much like I currently do with weapons in Warband that have alternate modes.  And like I said, and like you confirmed, the current animation is already less than a second, and combined with an average person's reaction speed the whole process is less than a second.  Literally nothing you've said has convinced me that players wouldn't use this feature because it would take too long.  Like I previously said, arguing this would take too long is like arguing blocking is pointless because it also requires a quarter of a second of reaction time and a blocking animation.

Have you played Overwatch?  I know it isn't everybody's cup of tea, but it has a huge playerbase that ranges from extremely casual to professional players.  A huge portion of that game is built around reacting to audio and visual tells, typically in a second or less.  I don't think a quick switch animation will be detrimental to the multiplayer playerbase, especially when (as it seems to me) individuals switching grips on their weapons probably won't even be a tertiary concern behind things like group tactics, general loadout, and general player skill, terrain awareness, etc.

 

[lolbash]

Like I previously said, arguing this would take too long is like arguing blocking is pointless because it also requires a quarter of a second of reaction time and a blocking animation.

The difference between blocking and your proposed weapon switching is that blocking is a required to survive a fight, and weapon switching only gives a slight advantage in combat with a significant drawback that requires time.

There is also the known fact that warband blocking is near instant, at around 20-50ms. Your comparison of how blocking takes too much time is an extreme exaggeration.

they can always switch when they have their opponent flinching.

Especially this quote proves my statement. You are relying on your opponent having to have already been stunned from an attack or other means to switch to armor piercing. What even is the point, when you can just use that time to attack and land a hit? The point is, it is unnessecary, and a waste of time.

And like I said, and like you confirmed, the current animation is already less than a second, and combined with an average person's reaction speed the whole process is less than a second. 

I did not, I said that this can equate to a lengthy 900 ms, or 1 whole second of wasted time that could have been spent attacking your opponent.

individuals switching grips on their weapons probably won't even be a tertiary concern behind things like group tactics, general loadout, and general player skill, terrain awareness, etc.

If this is the case, then what is even the point of implementing weapon switching in the first place if it is just going to be a useless feature? I see no reason how it can make the game fun.

 

[Akesh the Cursed]

I did not, I said that this can equate to a lengthy 900 ms, or 1 whole second of wasted time that could have been spent attacking your opponent.

Why should player choice be limited? Because the argument is that spamming left mouse button is better? That's restrictive and I look forward to more multi-mode weapons in Bannerlord.

 

[samoht]

And like I said, and like you confirmed, the current animation is already less than a second, and combined with an average person's reaction speed the whole process is less than a second. 

I did not, I said that this can equate to a lengthy 900 ms, or 1 whole second of wasted time that could have been spent attacking your opponent.

Wat.

You literally said the animations are between 500-700ms.

Also, I'm not sure if you math, but 900ms isn't 1 whole second.  It is in fact .9 seconds, which is less than 1 whole second.

I'm honestly being petty now because I'm not sure if you're being purposefully obtuse or if you can't understand simple ideas.

 

[DashRendar888]

Cool lots of discussion! What about a different attack command instead of switching stances?

For instance, if I wanted to use the spiked side of my war axe, maybe the alternate command would be pressing both the left and right triggers(PS4) and it does that piercing attack instead of performing the regular axe slash attack. That way you wouldn’t have to really switch anything, just the buttons you press.

PS
I’d be fine without an added animation, it can still look like the character is using the axe side of the weapon, I’ll just imagine my character’s flipping the weapon in his hand, just as long as it registers the attack as piercing.

 

[Bladerider]

I like the idea as long as the alternative stance of the weapon is not as good as using a side weapon with that kind of damage as its primary. Following your example, the axe spiked side shouldn't be as good as changing to use a military pick.

For instance, in Warband, the Iron War Axe has a cutting side and a spiked side, but it only does cutting damage? Wouldn’t it be cool if you could switch between the spiked side and the cutting axe side, thus switching between piercing and cutting damage. Maybe it could lead to balance issues?

This is not a balance issue, but a gameplay issue.

If there is a weapon that can do 30 cutting damage and 12 piercing damage if you press mode switch, then no one would switch mode because it is not worth wasting precious seconds required in competitive duels and melee fights for a very slight armor piercing property. There is no point. If such a feature is implemented it requires it to be seamless and easy to transition, which is not possible in a game like Mount and Blade unless there is a sort of "Smart" System that can automatically detect and determine which types of moveset to use when attack, but that brings its own set of problems that would be very disliked by the competitive community, which is inconsistent damage because of the Smart System, and the very real chance that false positives can occur such as lose you a kill because it switched to piercing while you attack a naked man because an armored opponent appeared next to him.

A very popular suggestion to fix this problem would be to

"Nerf cutting damage so piercing can pierce armor, like real life!"

Which brings up the same problem as the "two different types of arrows for bows" problem we have had one week ago.

This is a point where fun>realism has presence. If you have the choice between being able to kill everyone or only being allowed to lill a select half of people, them people always pick the first option, as limiting your targets is a stupid choice in a competitive play and renders many equipment useless.

If the different kind of damage doesn't make it worth to change to a side weapon depending on the enemy then, what is the point of having this system at all?
Each task should have its best tool. For example, if you face an enemy using a heavy shield it should be a good option to sheath your sword to use the axe you have as side weapon in order to get rid of the shield quickly.

 

[lolbash]

If the different kind of damage doesn't make it worth to change to a side weapon depending on the enemy then, what is the point of having this system at all?

Exactly. There is no positive gameplay benefit to this. If you add this feature in it can either become overpowered and hurt game balance, or underpowered and near useless depending on how it is balanced.

If you really want to put this in the game you need to accept that if you do not want to make the game unfun it needs to be near useless as to not harm the balance of the game.

 

[coo_snake]

I think that's for the developers who have the keys to balance and tweak the game to decide.

The reaction time is a non-factor in this. The switch to a different stance doesn't have to be a twitch reaction mechanic. It's adapting yourself to a different context. You have time to think.

It could be something meaningful like having a special ability on the secondary stance, like being able to hook people and displace them on a billhook. Or perhaps the secondary stance would net you better stagger at the cost of damage/attack speed to help your allies. What else? Maybe you could get wider sweeps that can hit several enemies instead of just one.

Or it could be a minor stats change with satisfying audio/visuals as I first stated. People could use it for the cool factor.
Maybe in some specific cases this stat would serve a greater purpose. Maybe better at destroying objects?


I think I could see all of these ideas fit into the game in some way. And that's just on the top of my head. I don't think you should think of this in terms of balance. We don't know how similar to Warband the combat will feel. I am hoping the feint spam and overall feel of combat will change. Get a fresh look at Mount and Blade.

 

[Bladerider]

If the different kind of damage doesn't make it worth to change to a side weapon depending on the enemy then, what is the point of having this system at all?

Exactly. There is no positive gameplay benefit to this. If you add this feature in it can either become overpowered and hurt game balance, or underpowered and near useless depending on how it is balanced.

If you really want to put this in the game you need to accept that if you do not want to make the game unfun it needs to be near useless as to not harm the balance of the game.

If the suggestion in this topic is done considering my comment about being it weaker than the use of a specialized side weapon then maybe it would end up being pointless. In that I could agree with you.
But I totally disagree with making useless or eliminating the cutting, piercing and blunt damage mechanic. This mechanic gives depth to the combat and diversity to the weapons. If you eliminate it then the differences between weapons would be mostly cosmetic. It doesnt hurt the game balance at all. You just need to be skilled enough to choose the correct weapon in the 4 slot you carry.