Mordhau

Mordhau combat bores me

140 66
  • 10 Sep '18
 s522662

the only bad thing about chivalry was the feints. nothing to counter it. dont see the reason why they focused on feints,etc to make the game better.

Knight 685 1851
  • 10 Sep '18
 ÐMontyleGueux

@coo_snake said:

@fmay2123 said:
I think that having a combat system that looks more believable is beneficial to bringing in and maintaining a player base. No new player wants to get beaten by an attack that zig zags all over the place or by someone turning 180 degrees to hit them instantly. That just makes them get mad at the game and not want to play it.

Mordhau already has such frustrating mechanics. The drag isn't a bad thing by essence but forcing people to look away from enemies is counter intuitive.

It is intuitive imo. Want your sword to hit the opponent later in its swing ? You create more distance between your sword and your target.

Not to mention hitting people when the weapon has visually no momentum and still dealing full damage is something many people will refuse to swallow.

This has been fixed in mordhau. Even slowed down attacks keep their momentum and you can't freeze your sword like you could in chivalry. Although I've seen some people that are able to reduce the momentum, it's rare and still look way better than in chivalry.

Feints are also very demoralizing as they are. Stab feints feel like a gamble every time if you decide to block them.

On the current patch feints aren't as strong as they were in chivalry since there's ways to counter them.

Knight 17 63
  • 10 Sep '18
 Wolframio

"

Delete chamber.
Add swing manipulation.
Remove points.
Add weight or classes.
Buff clashes
Add higher fov options. Seriously let me see my arms lol.."

Yeah how about we rename the game to Chivalry: Medieval Warfare 2.0? Smh

Knight 50 163
  • 11 Sep '18
 owen

swing manipulation means little when ur a bad player

239 289
  • 13 Sep '18
 idiotgod

@owen said:
swing manipulation means little when ur a bad player

Unlike feints

Knight 156 154
  • 2
  • 13 Sep '18
 Peregr1ne

@s522662 said:
the only bad thing about chivalry was the feints. nothing to counter it. dont see the reason why they focused on feints,etc to make the game better.

When it comes to melee in Chivalry, I have to agree with you. Feints were the only thing wrong with it. It was basically just a cheap one-button win which made it way too easy to bypass someone's defence. Of course, loads of people will tell me "Well, feints can be consistently read." Maybe that's true, though personally I've gone up against feints for years and am still no better at countering them, so I think it's impossible or just revolves around guessing whether the opponent will feint or not. Assuming i'm wrong there though, I don't see how it counters my point that feints are way too easy to use. I've seen this kind of argument before where people seem to think that just because there's a way you can counter an easy means of winning, that it somehow changes the fact that it's easy. Mordhau also has morphs, which are quite similar to feinting.

But there were more problems with Chivalry too, namely in the ranged department with crossbows and javelins. In the crossbow's case, the projectiles were so fast that they were difficult to avoid even at long range. Since you could maintain more range and still be consistent with your shots, this opened up more opportunities for hiding and generally shooting opponents that can't even see you, which made hitting them even easier. I remember one time I was in a scrim with Clash using the light crossbow for instance and I achieved between 10-20 kills and 40+ assists, a feat that I've never got close to with any bow while I was in Clash. Now, the javelins' main problem was it's ridiculous fire rate coupled with damage. Most high fire rate weapons have low damage which forces you to be more consecutive with your shooting. Not in the javelins' case though, and using javelins granted me the easiest double and triple kills ever in the game. Currently the longbow and crossbow in Mordhau have the same issue as Chivalry's crossbows, though hopefully they'll change that in the future.

As for why Mordhau is focused on feints..well..in spite of advertising it as a skill-based game, I suppose the devs realised that they will have to have some easier methods of killing to attract the vast majority of players. Can't really blame them as they will need this game to be popular. The thing to remember is that most people are lazy and just want all the success and none of the effort. They aren't willing to persevere with losing over and over again until they eventually start winning. They quickly feel overwhelmed, bored and then they give up. It's why nearly every big FPS game has at least one thing that's easy to kill with.

Baron 1551 2083
  • 14 Sep '18
 yourcrippledson

@Wolframio said:
"

Delete chamber.
Add swing manipulation.
Remove points.
Add weight or classes.
Buff clashes
Add higher fov options. Seriously let me see my arms lol.."

Yeah how about we rename the game to Chivalry: Medieval Warfare 2.0? Smh

Yeah improve and expand upon a unique game that had no business being as popular or long lived as it was. What a retarded idea right?

Instead, let's gut what made most players stick with it for thousands of hours.
Make combat focussed around a mechanic that was simple, yet so disliked that it was essentially banned from use by the community at large.
Eliminate all emergent gameplay. So basically remove the players freedom to be creative choose how they want to play, and instead force them to play the singular way the devs designed it to be played or just die like a nub.

Mordhau has better animations, I'll give it that.

301 875
  • 1
  • 14 Sep '18
 Naleaus

Ah fuck off with that emergent gameplay shit. You have more options in Mordhau, you just don't like them.

In Chivalry, you can feint and drag, or any combination of the two, with stabs, overheads and slashes. Luckily both drags and feints looked fucking horrible, otherwise no one would ever die, right?

In Mordhau you have feints, drags (yes, they're still useful, just different) and morphs. You also, for better or worse have undercuts as well as the other three attacks. You can even use 240 if you really wanted for even more control over making your attack look like absolute shit.

Cause in the end that's really all either game comes down to. Scare your opponent into parrying by making your attack look hideous. You like pressing a button then moving your mouse. Some people like pressing multiple buttons. Some combine the two for some real emergent gameplay.

80 201
  • 2
  • 14 Sep '18
 Seseau

@yourcrippledson said:

@Wolframio said:
"

Delete chamber.
Add swing manipulation.
Remove points.
Add weight or classes.
Buff clashes
Add higher fov options. Seriously let me see my arms lol.."

Yeah how about we rename the game to Chivalry: Medieval Warfare 2.0? Smh

Yeah improve and expand upon a unique game that had no business being as popular or long lived as it was. What a retarded idea right?

Instead, let's gut what made most players stick with it for thousands of hours.
Make combat focussed around a mechanic that was simple, yet so disliked that it was essentially banned from use by the community at large.
Eliminate all emergent gameplay. So basically remove the players freedom to be creative choose how they want to play, and instead force them to play the singular way the devs designed it to be played or just die like a nub.

Mordhau has better animations, I'll give it that.

99% of the population hated the absurd dragging mechanics of Chivalry. It's quite literally what killed the game, in combination with TB's mishandling of updates and the game in general.

At the end of the day, Naleaus is right: winning is either about catching your opponent off guard, or about making your attack look as disgustingly unreadable as possible. The first one is pretty universally fun, the second mostly leads to frustration. You're just staring at the guy twisting his body and going "what on earth is that?". If the combat retains that nature, it will have a good launch and will peter out for the same reasons Chiv did. Unless map mechanics really bring it home.

Knight 934 941
  • 14 Sep '18
 afiNity

This whole discussion disgusts me.
"Hurr durr chivalry is so broken"
Yeah no shit, no one is denying that. Maybe we can just put this on record:
Yes, Chivalry is a broken piece of shit. But also yes, dragging is a fun mechanic and without it the combat in Chivalry would be completely pointless.
Maybe we can then proceed with discussing how you could make a dragging mechanic that is fun and not broken, instead of using this "Chivalry is so broken"-ad hominem argument everytime someone uses dragging and Chivalry in the same sentence.

301 875
  • 3
  • 14 Sep '18
 Naleaus

That's not what the point of my post was. It was to counter the emergent gameplay bullshit. All I said through a bit of hyperbole is that the games are the same concept, but that Mordhau has more options, and not less like OP claims. But I had 4 hours of sleep and I'm feeling froggy, so let's look at drags then, shall we?

The best ones in Mordhau have always been the ones that look the worst. Your waterfalls, frenchfriesdrag, cucumber drag. Even your run of the mill jump drag looks pretty bad currently to your casual spectator.

So you say, let's make angle matter more so that big drags aren't necessary. This allows you to do easier drags, but still buffs the worst ones, and if you overdo the angles it feels like shit in 1vX. (I'm fine with slight nerf of parrying angle by the way, but I mean slight.) So you get your easy to land drags, but make other things feel worse.

So why did Chiv work? Cause they didn't care if things LOOKED good, and player retention suffered. Parry was pretty fucking easy in Chiv, but through a combination of looking terrible, weapon timings, being able to drag windups through people, reverses, etc, kept drags viable.

So what can Mordhau do? They're already doing it. They may have overnerfed them at the moment, but that's fine and the way you want to go about it. If they feel they're too weak they can slowly go about strengthening them. And in the end, they need to balance around team games instead of duels, and besides stab issues at the moment, team stuff feels pretty good.

The other option would be a complete rework of all game mechanics. This isn't going to happen.
But that's not the issue. The OP doesn't want good looking drags. He wants CHIV drags that give him full control to stop time. That's why this discussion is stupid, because he wants Chiv 2 with pretty graphics, not Mordhau. And fuck that.

80 201
  • 14 Sep '18
 Seseau

@afiNity said:
This whole discussion disgusts me.
"Hurr durr chivalry is so broken"
Yeah no shit, no one is denying that. Maybe we can just put this on record:
Yes, Chivalry is a broken piece of shit. But also yes, dragging is a fun mechanic and without it the combat in Chivalry would be completely pointless.
Maybe we can then proceed with discussing how you could make a dragging mechanic that is fun and not broken, instead of using this "Chivalry is so broken"-ad hominem argument everytime someone uses dragging and Chivalry in the same sentence.

I truly believe people who want to make combat the end all be all of Mordhau misunderstand the reasons of Chivalry's incredible success and inevitable fall.

I would lay money on the fact that most people bought and enjoyed Chivalry because it made them feel like a medieval warrior. Because they were having a blast storming castles, manning catapults and ballistas and laughing their ass off getting their head chopped off. In the first few days I played Chivalry, I legitimately cried laughing whenever someone would behead me or I would decapitate someone. It was just fucking fun.

Then the combat really came in, the dreaded "you're out of the level 15 server" phase. Which almost nobody gets through: because dragging, at least in Chivalry, is just disgusting. The large majority of players will find it unfun, and have. Yes, dragging in Mordhau is different and objectively better. It's still, at the core, a mechanic most people will find unfun. It doesn't make it objectively unfun however, it's just how it will likely be perceived. And the fact that amidst this very small sample of a playerbase that we have here, people are already arguing about its merits and its fun factor says a whole lot.

My personal opinion is and has been that Mordhau, to replicate or even surpass Chivalry's success, should focus on battle scenarios which make the players feel like they're actually on a medieval battlefield. Combat needs to be good of course, but really doesn't benefit much from being complex.

So yeah, keep dragging as it is and make sure to explain it very clearly. But don't make the mistake of focusing entirely and solely on combat, it really won't keep too many players around.

Knight 934 941
  • 14 Sep '18
 afiNity

I couldn't care less if the scenario of Mordhau or Chivalry is medieval, science-fiction or teletubbies.
Your post shows at least the problems of the low-rank servers in Chivalry:
In the early days there were no low-rank servers and at the same time there was much less crying about feints or drags. It was part of the game, there was no no-feint meta, especially not im competitive matches.
These low-rank servers tricked generations of players into some kind of gameplay that has nothing to do with the actual meta in the game.
Yes, dragging in Chivalry became problematic, especially after people figured out how to do reverse-ohs and shit. But without dragging Chivalry would be nothing.
I already explained that before but take Chivalry-drags as they were meta between 2012-late 2013 and prevent everything that goes further than that and you have a fun game.
Mordhau is taking away from the footwork and the drags and tries to compensate it with tons of mechanics that lead to nothing but a reaction test simulator.
Also do you really think people won't cry about the gameplay mechanics in Mordhau? Mordhau is much more complicated than Chivalry by design, there are way more mechanics that a noob won't understand at all.
Also don't use the word "objectively" when it's nothing but your opinion.

80 201
  • 14 Sep '18
 Seseau

@afiNity said:
I couldn't care less if the scenario of Mordhau or Chivalry is medieval, science-fiction or teletubbies.
Your post shows at least the problems of the low-rank servers in Chivalry:
In the early days there were no low-rank servers and at the same time there was much less crying about feints or drags. It was part of the game, there was no no-feint meta, especially not im competitive matches.
These low-rank servers tricked generations of players into some kind of gameplay that has nothing to do with the actual meta in the game.
Yes, dragging in Chivalry became problematic, especially after people figured out how to do reverse-ohs and shit. But without dragging Chivalry would be nothing.
I already explained that before but take Chivalry-drags as they were meta between 2012-late 2013 and prevent everything that goes further than that and you have a fun game.
Mordhau is taking away from the footwork and the drags and tries to compensate it with tons of mechanics that lead to nothing but a reaction test simulator.
Also do you really think people won't cry about the gameplay mechanics in Mordhau? Mordhau is much more complicated than Chivalry by design, there are way more mechanics that a noob won't understand at all.
Also don't use the word "objectively" when it's nothing but your opinion.

I specifically used it in a phrase that does not reflect my opinion, but OK.

Baron 1551 2083
  • 15 Sep '18
 yourcrippledson

@Naleaus said:
Ah fuck off with that emergent gameplay shit. You have more options in Mordhau, you just don't like them.

In Chivalry, you can feint and drag, or any combination of the two, with stabs, overheads and slashes. Luckily both drags and feints looked fucking horrible, otherwise no one would ever die, right?

In Mordhau you have feints, drags (yes, they're still useful, just different) and morphs. You also, for better or worse have undercuts as well as the other three attacks. You can even use 240 if you really wanted for even more control over making your attack look like absolute shit.

Cause in the end that's really all either game comes down to. Scare your opponent into parrying by making your attack look hideous. You like pressing a button then moving your mouse. Some people like pressing multiple buttons. Some combine the two for some real emergent gameplay.

Just spam a bunch of buttons. Hope the enemy flinches. If they do i hit them, if they don't, it is their turn to spam a bunch of buttons. Footwork is limited. Mouse movement is limited. So spam the buttons and hope for the best.

No i don't like those options. And i don't understand why people like you get so angry whenever anybody talks about how they don't like those options.

239 289
  • 3
  • 15 Sep '18
 idiotgod

Their goal seems to be to make it so nubs don't die as fast, and hopefully they'll tell their friends to buy the game so they can play it for 100 hours before they leave, compared to Chivalries 30 hours.

Chivalry didn't hide the skill ceiling. It was laid bare, which most casual players don't appreciate and instead lament.
While hardcore players had the opposite reaction. They would come from level 15, a simple yet satisfying hack n slash game, and at level 16 realize there must be a lot more to it. It drives those players to get better and discover the ins and outs of combat. When I saw people doing reversals for the first time I thought it was epic, and couldn't wait to get good enough with each weapon to be able to do them consistently. People say it looks retarded. But that is subjective. Go watch Obi-Wan and Anakin fight it out in Episode 3 lol and tell me how many reversals and spins they do. It looked badass to me, and all these people saying Chivalry was pure shit are clueless. Do they know how many people have 1000, 2000, 3000 hours or more in that game? I don't see how Mordhau could hope to hit those numbers.

I guess some people think it is a good thing that you can look at Mordhau and see all the ins and outs of combat within the first 5 minutes... then it is just attrition to learn the animations and build your reactions and shit. But I see it as a downgrade.

You didn't have to drag in any specific way to be good at Chivalry. You didn't have to Feint to be good at Chivalry. You didn't have to do reversals to be good at chivalry. Fighting each player told a unique story. They each had their own style. You could play the way you wanted.
In Mordhau, you're gonna play the right way, or you're just gonna be bad. That is how I see combat as more simplistic. Just learn the animations, build your reaction speeds, and play the right way. The combat system currently has fewer viable emergent playstyles period. Doesn't matter that there are more buttons you can push if they all fall into such a neat little tiny box of acceptable times to do them.

Knight 925 2541
  • 15 Sep '18
 Pred

@idiotgod said:
Their goal seems to be to make it so nubs don't die as fast

What? Noobs get annihilated in 3 seconds by 3x stab combo. You land the first attack because it's so fast they didn't parry in time, then they do 2 misparries so you get 2 additional free hits and that's it. After they get a grip on the speed and are sometimes able to parry, you just throw in 1 combo feint in the process and you are good to go again. That's how it was when people with Beta access joined.

301 875
  • 1
  • 15 Sep '18
 Naleaus

@yourcrippledson said:

@Naleaus said:
Ah fuck off with that emergent gameplay shit. You have more options in Mordhau, you just don't like them.

In Chivalry, you can feint and drag, or any combination of the two, with stabs, overheads and slashes. Luckily both drags and feints looked fucking horrible, otherwise no one would ever die, right?

In Mordhau you have feints, drags (yes, they're still useful, just different) and morphs. You also, for better or worse have undercuts as well as the other three attacks. You can even use 240 if you really wanted for even more control over making your attack look like absolute shit.

Cause in the end that's really all either game comes down to. Scare your opponent into parrying by making your attack look hideous. You like pressing a button then moving your mouse. Some people like pressing multiple buttons. Some combine the two for some real emergent gameplay.

Just spam a bunch of buttons. Hope the enemy flinches. If they do i hit them, if they don't, it is their turn to spam a bunch of buttons. Footwork is limited. Mouse movement is limited. So spam the buttons and hope for the best.

No i don't like those options. And i don't understand why people like you get so angry whenever anybody talks about how they don't like those options.

I get angry because you want Chivalry 2 instead of Mordhau. I get angry because you over simplify the things you don't like to make it seem like they're objectively less interesting. I get angry because you say things like footwork is limited, which makes me believe you still don't play the game outside of bots. I get tired of the same argument over and over. You can still drag in this game, shocking.

With that said, you can enjoy what you want. Should have posted in the feedback thread instead of a new post with a clickbait title if you didn't want people to criticize you though.

301 875
  • 15 Sep '18
 Naleaus

@idiotgod said:
Their goal seems to be to make it so nubs don't die as fast, and hopefully they'll tell their friends to buy the game so they can play it for 100 hours before they leave, compared to Chivalries 30 hours.

As Pred said, noobs gets absolutely slaughtered in this game.

Chivalry didn't hide the skill ceiling. It was laid bare, which most casual players don't appreciate and instead lament.
While hardcore players had the opposite reaction. They would come from level 15, a simple yet satisfying hack n slash game, and at level 16 realize there must be a lot more to it. It drives those players to get better and discover the ins and outs of combat.

This isn't a good thing. You want to preferably keep both types of players. Otherwise you sell 3 million copies but retain maybe 2-3k of those for more than 50 hours.

People say it looks retarded. But that is subjective. Go watch Obi-Wan and Anakin fight it out in Episode 3 lol and tell me how many reversals and spins they do.

No armor with a sword that requires no momentum to cut through something. If the setting wasn't medieval knights, then people wouldn't think it looks like shit. Or, they mean the animations are bad, maybe that.

It looked badass to me, and all these people saying Chivalry was pure shit are clueless. Do they know how many people have 1000, 2000, 3000 hours or more in that game? I don't see how Mordhau could hope to hit those numbers.

3000+ Chivalry hours here. Game is shit for lots of reasons. It had some things going for it too, like being the first of it's type, TO, funny sounds and gory visuals, etc. I have over 1000 Mordhau hours as well, and there are quite a few others that do too. When the game releases, it'll have funny sounds, gory visuals, big team mode, lots of shit for casuals to do, lots of character customization, etc. Lots of stuff to keep people playing. And fun is subjective.

I guess some people think it is a good thing that you can look at Mordhau and see all the ins and outs of combat within the first 5 minutes... then it is just attrition to learn the animations and build your reactions and shit. But I see it as a downgrade.

You think you can do that cause you played Chivalry first and have a basis for understanding what's possible. But that's also a detriment cause people play like it's Chivalry instead of trying new things. "It doesn't work like in Chiv, it must not be possible!" I get lots of "wtf" reactions in game for doing things that people haven't seen yet.

You didn't have to drag in any specific way to be good at Chivalry. You didn't have to Feint to be good at Chivalry. You didn't have to do reversals to be good at chivalry. Fighting each player told a unique story. They each had their own style. You could play the way you wanted.
In Mordhau, you're gonna play the right way, or you're just gonna be bad. That is how I see combat as more simplistic. Just learn the animations, build your reaction speeds, and play the right way. The combat system currently has fewer viable emergent playstyles period. Doesn't matter that there are more buttons you can push if they all fall into such a neat little tiny box of acceptable times to do them.

This is all mostly wrong, you don't have to play a single way in Mordhau, exactly the same as you don't have to in Chivalry. I probably feint less than most players with lots of hours but still top scoreboards. People flock to whatever they think the meta is instead of trying stuff on their own and then think they have to play a certain way. You don't.

Knight 761 3291
  • 15 Sep '18
 Mittsies

There's nothing to discuss here. The scope of the topic is pointlessly broad. If you have an issue with a specific element of the game (like drags) and you are willing to provide some suggestions on how to fix those: then you can start a new thread about that specifically. Besides, it's clear that you didn't post this thread to start a discussion, you just want to loudly state your opinions instead of using one of the many the general feedback threads:

https://mordhau.com/forum/topic/13517/alpha-build-17-discussion-thread/
https://mordhau.com/forum/topic/10085/feedback-and-suggestions-thread/

@yourcrippledson said:
Eliminate all emergent gameplay. So basically remove the players freedom to be creative choose how they want to play, and instead force them to play the singular way the devs designed it to be played or just die like a nub.

Just spam a bunch of buttons. Hope the enemy flinches. If they do i hit them, if they don't, it is their turn to spam a bunch of buttons. Footwork is limited. Mouse movement is limited. So spam the buttons and hope for the best.

>when people don't agree with your initial viewpoints and your posts boil down into distorted bitterness

oJbt45l.png