What attack direction do you play with?
- Thread starter SeánC
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
this will give you a warped view of whos inverse and whos not. Inverse people will generally be more inclined to click on the thread and vote on the poll, as they are not the norm. Many people who play normal will not think anything of this thread, as they are the norm, and wont bother voting.
If you want a more accurate picture, do an form and make a spreadsheet of whos inverse whos not and send it to people
If you want a more accurate picture, do an form and make a spreadsheet of whos inverse whos not and send it to people
I mean, that's some attempt at 500IQ brain there O'Neil; I don't think having preference to either of those directions would make you 'click on a thread' more, especially considering Inverse is played by pretty much most new players from 2017 (a lot of the current active player base).
If you made this thread in 2015, you'd see like a 5/95 normal split - you're looking at least 50/50 now. As someone who pioneered the inverse style, it was solely all down to me of course.
If you made this thread in 2015, you'd see like a 5/95 normal split - you're looking at least 50/50 now. As someone who pioneered the inverse style, it was solely all down to me of course.
I changed it to Inverse on the first day I played the game after about 2 minutes in the tutorial. It just felt natural to me to swing to the left by moving the mouse to the left, although I get why Normal can make sense too. It had nothing to do with Inverse possibly having an advantage.
Er... inverse makes it so that you swing to the left by moving the mouse to the right. I'm confused.
(Update: wow! I'm even more confused than I thought; I just checked in-game, and it's the other way around; I somehow didn't notice that, even after all these hundreds of hours playing.)
As for the merits of either of the two systems, I can see why someone would find it intuitive to wind up to the left by moving the mouse left, and I can see why others would find it intuitive to swing to the left by moving the mouse left. It really just depends on whether you think of the leftward mouse movement as the initial wind-up, or the actual swing itself.
I use "by mouse movement" simply 'coz that's what I'm used to, but I don't think it'd be that weird to use the other system (aside from the week or so it'd take me to relearn things).
Last edited:
Normal: The standard since Mount & Blade. Conventional. Safe. Used by probably ~60% of players.
Inverse: Gained popularity mid-2010s. Feels more natural than using Normal -depending on who you ask. The orthodox/southpaw boxing example used by @Oakenlix is a perfect analogy of this style. Probably used by ~40% of players.
Relative Enemy Position: Extremely interesting. Offers heavy pros and cons.
Pros:
-You don't have to think about your attacks -at all. Just click.
-Can throw chaotic chain feints by just rapidly alternating lmb/rmb -with minimal to zero screen shake
-Since there is no screen shake from your attacks, you can keep your opponent centered on your screen at all times
-No-Tell (non-telegraphed) windups, since your character's center-line doesn't turn right/left/up/down during them
Cons:
-No ability to chamber
-Little to no control of your attack direction (bad for team fights)
-Can't use specific attacks or techniques (no hilt spamming, no stabs, no high-level feints)
To my knowledge, Relative Enemy Position was used by a small handful of cRPG and PW players, no one in Native MP used this.
Movement Keys: An utterly bizarre fighting style. You'd probably have to be a savant, an idiot, or an idiot-savant to use this. If anyone in the Mount & Blade community uses movement keys for their attack direction, please step forward, so we can study you for science.
Inverse: Gained popularity mid-2010s. Feels more natural than using Normal -depending on who you ask. The orthodox/southpaw boxing example used by @Oakenlix is a perfect analogy of this style. Probably used by ~40% of players.
Relative Enemy Position: Extremely interesting. Offers heavy pros and cons.
Pros:
-You don't have to think about your attacks -at all. Just click.
-Can throw chaotic chain feints by just rapidly alternating lmb/rmb -with minimal to zero screen shake
-Since there is no screen shake from your attacks, you can keep your opponent centered on your screen at all times
-No-Tell (non-telegraphed) windups, since your character's center-line doesn't turn right/left/up/down during them
Cons:
-No ability to chamber
-Little to no control of your attack direction (bad for team fights)
-Can't use specific attacks or techniques (no hilt spamming, no stabs, no high-level feints)
To my knowledge, Relative Enemy Position was used by a small handful of cRPG and PW players, no one in Native MP used this.
Movement Keys: An utterly bizarre fighting style. You'd probably have to be a savant, an idiot, or an idiot-savant to use this. If anyone in the Mount & Blade community uses movement keys for their attack direction, please step forward, so we can study you for science.
I didn't realize inverse attacks have become more popular over the years. I suppose it makes it less of an advantage now. As a lifetime inverse user, when I used to play (mostly cRPG), people would tell me my attacks are hard to block, and I had no idea why until I met someone who used it too, and it was really uncomfortable. You see the incoming attack, but your brain just makes you block in the wrong direction because the opponent's movement confuses you. Takes a while to get used to.
I would add that inverse has some pros and cons as well due to the nature of it, in my experience.
- It makes same-direction feints harder to perform, which is especially noticeable with 1h weapons.
- Using 1h on horseback is very clunky.
- Spinning attacks are much more fluid and natural which can get people off-guard.
Overall, I've always felt inverse attacks work best with long weapons and aggressive, somewhat berserk kinda style of fighting.
I would add that inverse has some pros and cons as well due to the nature of it, in my experience.
- It makes same-direction feints harder to perform, which is especially noticeable with 1h weapons.
- Using 1h on horseback is very clunky.
- Spinning attacks are much more fluid and natural which can get people off-guard.
Overall, I've always felt inverse attacks work best with long weapons and aggressive, somewhat berserk kinda style of fighting.
No one used relative because it had a game-breaking bug which made your character teleport/rubberband on the client side, so it's practically worthless.
Inverse has been used since the game began, usually used to create some cool tricks on duel but eventually came to battle.
I dont think there's any real 'pro' for using normal attack direction; you're worse off in pretty much everything.
Inverse has been used since the game began, usually used to create some cool tricks on duel but eventually came to battle.
I dont think there's any real 'pro' for using normal attack direction; you're worse off in pretty much everything.
What is the reason that inverse makes your attacks faster?
if you are inverse, you can trade left swings faster (without a shield) because inputting a left swing and doing a right block (to defend against incoming left swings) requires 0 mouse movement. you move your mouse to the right to do both. as you say, it also naturally incites better angling and is often confusing to players who are unfamiliar with inverse when you move and angle yourself in ways which they aren't expecting. that isn't as much as an advantage now, since i think most people have some experience against inverse players, but certainly when i first started using it i remember that the overwhelming majority of people had very little or no experience dealing with inverse and the tricks were extremely effective.
Yeah it's insane for angles
