Mordhau

Stab Keybinds

Count 649 2420

I'm one of the 100% keybind players in the game, and in addition to binding all strike angles to the keyboard/mouse I also use 2 different keys for left and right stab. However the left and right lower stab is a move I would constantly use, and would very much enjoy implementing into my style, if it were not for the fuzzy and unpredictable experience I have whenever I try to use the 240 system.

In the current state it seems there are 4 stab animation variations (upper and lower for left and right), various morph animations (underhands into lower stabs etc) with unique visual and timing differences, and various animation transitions which are exlusively available only to players using the 240 input system.

For example if you feint an upper right strike and immediately follow up using 240 with a lower right or lower left stab the apparent transition between them is smoother and harder to read. Now do it again using the vanilla "left stab" and "right stab" which are the only options keybind users are given. The difference is obvious.

Keybind users are not only being limited to less playstyle options than players who use the 240 system, they are also limited to these two stabs which, in my opinion, are animated in a way that makes them more obvious and readable.

In the interest of balance, freedom of input, and fair play I feel the game should have all stab animations available as keybind options to help create uniformity in-game regardless of whether a player is 100% 240 system, 100% keybinds, or any mixture thereof.

76 151
 intTobey

I think it's good for difficult-to-read movements to have difficult-to-execute commands. Otherwise eventually experienced players will just key out the most subtle and unreadable morphs and ripostes with mindless ease (cough unchamberable overhead accel ripostes cough). I know they'll never remove binds, but I think the game would play better for it. With one simple change the skill ceiling would be elevated greatly (and the population diminished greatly).

I'm off-topic ranting though.

On-topic: If there were a bind for every attack type you would probably need two keyboards. There has to be a better way.

Count 649 2420

@intTobey said:
I think it's good for difficult-to-read movements to have difficult-to-execute commands. Otherwise eventually experienced players will just key out the most subtle and unreadable morphs and ripostes with mindless ease (cough unchamberable overhead accel ripostes cough). I know they'll never remove binds, but I think the game would play better for it. With one simple change the skill ceiling would be elevated greatly (and the population diminished greatly).

This isn't about "difficult-to-execute commands." This is about something that cannot be done without using one of two existing input methods. In other words it's not just hard to accomplish. For players who don't use 240 it's impossible to accomplish and creates a lack of uniformity.

On-topic: If there were a bind for every attack type you would probably need two keyboards. There has to be a better way.

The "better way" is that those missing stab angles should be available as keybind options. You do realize that just because they are available doesn't mean they ALL have to be bound to keys... Right? They should be there as something optional so players can customize the game input to what is comfortable for them. Not arbitrarily forced into using a specific input method if they want to utilize all available animations.

We very nearly already have every attack bindable except for the aforementioned missing stab angles, and I assure you I do not need another keyboard to stick "lower right stab" onto my mouse wheel or another key and instantly start using it today.

I've been waiting to see if the devs were going to add these simple common sense keybind options for over a year now, and frankly I'm surprised it hasn't been done yet.

Knight 606 1511
  • 4 Dec
 Pred

Another trap of 240 tbh. It has a negative impact on the game, mostly through animation problems it introduces (ripostes, stabs, shit blending too much or not blending at all, unintelligible angles when opponent is doing torso movements) but also by making the whole control system a mess.

6 directions of strikes + 2 stabs should be it.

Duchess 590 2361
  • 4 Dec
 Stouty

2 stabs is already excessive

Knight 606 1511
  • 4 Dec
 Pred

@Stouty said:
2 stabs is already excessive

Tbh.

The Cerebral Palsy 1H alternate stab is especially redundant.

Count 649 2420

While I won't say I agree that 2 stabs is too much, and personally prefer 6 stab angle keybind options, removing those extra 4 stab animations from 240 would be a better solution than nothing. However it would still be simpler and less likely to trigger vitriol from either side for them to be keybind options.

It does surprise me how shortsighted and apathetic some people have been in the past regarding this. If this remains unaddressed then not long after release new players are going to start asking the (legitimate) question of: "Why can those 240 guys use animations I can't?"

Knight 389 1246
  • 10 Dec
 Mittsies

While we're on the subject, just remove 240 entirely.
You'll still be able to angle your attacks with the mouse, it'll just be locked to the 6 primary angles.

Duke 5164 11173
  • 10 Dec
 Jax — Community Manager

@Mittsies said:
While we're on the subject, just remove 240 entirely.
You'll still be able to angle your attacks with the mouse, it'll just be locked to the 6 primary angles.

no

just because you don't want to use it doesn't mean it should be removed

why get rid of the other 234 angles when the animation tech already supports them?

226 614
  • 10 Dec
 Naleaus

@Jax said:

@Mittsies said:
While we're on the subject, just remove 240 entirely.
You'll still be able to angle your attacks with the mouse, it'll just be locked to the 6 primary angles.

no

just because you don't want to use it doesn't mean it should be removed

why get rid of the other 234 angles when the animation tech already supports them?

If you want a serious answer, it's because having 6 angles only allows for angle specific animations that can help remove ambiguity while doing things to hide/break your animations. If the extra angles had any purpose other than obfuscation of what you're doing they'd have a purpose, but chamber angles are pretty lax and otherwise they really don't help you hit anyone at all.

Duke 5164 11173
  • 1
  • 10 Dec
 Jax — Community Manager

Extra angles allow more precision and removing them would reduce the freedom allowed. We're not going to go in and make 6 new animations per weapon type when we already have a system that works.

I think we all want attacks to be more readable, but removing the freedom of attacks from the game isn't the way to do this.

Knight 389 1246
  • 10 Dec
 Mittsies

@Jax said:
just because you don't want to use it doesn't mean it should be removed

why get rid of the other 234 angles when the animation tech already supports them?

Extra angles allow more precision and removing them would reduce the freedom allowed.

I think we all want attacks to be more readable, but removing the freedom of attacks from the game isn't the way to do this.

There shouldn't exist a control scheme that provides advantages to its user outside of comfort and preference IMO.

@Jax said:
We're not going to go in and make 6 new animations per weapon type when we already have a system that works.

?

Duke 5164 11173
  • 10 Dec
 Jax — Community Manager

There shouldn't exist a control scheme that provides advantages to its user outside of comfort and preference IMO.

general consensus is that binds are superior to 240, however 240 has more fidelity/control. it balances out imo

current animations are left attack and right attack. everything else is procedurally animated.

Knight 606 1511
  • 10 Dec
 Pred

@Jax said:
Extra angles allow more precision and removing them would reduce the freedom allowed. We're not going to go in and make 6 new animations per weapon type when we already have a system that works.

I think we all want attacks to be more readable, but removing the freedom of attacks from the game isn't the way to do this.

The freedom of 240 angles is like having the freedom of choosing any of 9999 games on this thing:

tetris.jpg

There are only 6 angles you need, "240 freedom" is not even a good selling point, there is no reason to compromise on more important issues just to keep it. Especially when 6 separate angles would open an additional possibility of OHs, Slahes and Uppercuts all having their independent turncaps, which seems to be a source of major clunkiness and restricted feeling.

226 614
  • 11 Dec
 Naleaus

@Jax said:

There shouldn't exist a control scheme that provides advantages to its user outside of comfort and preference IMO.

general consensus is that binds are superior to 240, however 240 has more fidelity/control. it balances out imo

current animations are left attack and right attack. everything else is procedurally animated.

What Pred said. I don't care if you go in and change shit, it's too late at this juncture. But besides the ability to make angles more difficult to discern, there's really no advantage to the extra "freedom" you get from 240. If super precise drags existed, it might, but they don't due to other balance reasons.

The reasoning to not use procedural animations is because then each angle can have a very distinctive animation, windup/release timings for specific angles can be changed to allow more fine tuning for balance, etc

Again, too late for all of that. Just make current stuff as good as possible and release it, then fix it later if it's an issue.

76 151
  • 4
  • 11 Dec
 intTobey

@Naleaus said:

But besides the ability to make angles more difficult to discern, there's really no advantage to the extra "freedom" you get from 240.

The reasoning to not use procedural animations is because then each angle can have a very distinctive animation-

That's a good thing though - making angles more variable. Without that, with binds alone, chambering and parrying become entirely a timing test because you already know what angle they're using.

@Mittsies said:

There shouldn't exist a control scheme that provides advantages to its user outside of comfort and preference IMO.

The irony of a binds user saying this. Surely you know how difficult it is to consistently execute a max angle underhand or overhead with 240. Yet binds give you the advantage of performing these superior attacks with ease.


Regarding binds vs 240:

Without 240 much of the perception tests of Mordhau combat are gone, and defense becomes simplified. With only the 6 bind angles to discern between, recognizing angles becomes much easier. It would then be mostly a timing-based game, and the main way to get through the defense of a seasoned player would be to accel/drag... or to distort your animations with contortions and spastic gyrations such as jumps, facehugging, torso twisting, head bobbing, and spinning. You already see this with many players. Do we really want to encourage that style of offense?

We've played that game already. Without 240, Mordhau is just a Chivalry expansion.

"The combat is the absolute core of this game. It is something we've prototyped and tested over more than a year to make sure it is designed to encourage fights that look like fights and not ballet auditions. That it is easy to pick up and difficult to master and that it works smoothly online. The controls are the first step. Since tastes differ, we plan to offer a variety of control schemes to make those with experience in previous melee games feel at home."

-Marox
https://youtu.be/p-B4AwgArwA?t=53

So there it is: the word from on high subtly stating that binds are only in the game to give Chiv players a familiar control method.

The 240 system is the foundation of Mordhau combat. Binds corrupt everything.

  1. Binds allow all of that contorting and spazzing, the ballet auditions that the devs wanted to avoid. Try doing all that with 240. Try even doing a fully accelerated lookdown overhead riposte; it's really hard. This is GOOD. Lookdown overhead ripostes are too easy to perform with binds for how potent they are. The same goes for many other ugly moves that are difficult to perform without binds.
  2. "That it is easy to pick up and difficult to master-" Binds are easy to pick up, sure. But they aren't difficult to master. Only the 240 system fits that description. Binds greatly simplify offense.

IMHO, binds are the main flaw of Mordhau. Binds encourage fights that don't look like fights, they lower the skill floor and the skill ceiling, and they discourage attack variety.

If I were king, binds would be removed. But then the long-term population of Mordhau would suffer, because the vast majority of new players will never have the patience to master 240.

I do at least hope, for the above reasons, that binds be limited in the variety of attacks they can deliver. Players should be encouraged to use 240, not allowed to abandon it entirely. I know where that road leads.

226 614
  • 1
  • 11 Dec
 Naleaus

@intTobey said:

I'm not sure if you're arguing about the same thing. The 240 control scheme itself is fine, I don't think anyone cares about retaining that. The problem is that the procedural animations would be better as independent animations for each angle. You could then try to make animations for each particular angle that don't get broken by staring at the ground, jumping, etc. You could give them independent timings to allow more mixups, different turncaps, etc.

The degree of control as far as current 240 implementation really doesn't add much to the game. You can't do many precision drags and chamber angles are already forgiving as hell. What difficulty there is from reading mid angle attacks comes from distorting your body during the attack, which is what you're against, not the mid angle itself.
I actually use 240 for slashes and underhands typically. Not because of any function, but because I'm lazy. Its not very difficult to make animations difficult to read for most players, and it's easy enough to do all the stupid looking shit with 240. Removing binds won't fix that. I would hope that independent animations and timings would do a better job of that.

Again, this is all moot. Nothing is going to change this late in the game.

76 151
  • 3
  • 11 Dec
 intTobey

@Naleaus said:

I'm not sure if you're arguing about the same thing.

My bad, I should format that differently. The larger, divided portion of that post was intended mostly to address the issue of binds vs 240, not as a reply to your comments.

@Naleaus said:

The degree of control as far as current 240 implementation really doesn't add much to the game.

Again, this is all moot. Nothing is going to change this late in the game.

Yeah, I don't think having the full procedural 240 was really necessary. It's a cool achievement in animation and game design, but it's probably a little excessive. However, it does make me feel like you're really swinging a weapon and not just executing a predefined attack type.

But yes, they're not going to make any radical changes now. I just wanted to weigh in on why I think binds are bad for the game.

350 573

Pretty sure this game is already 99% about timing and then spazzing through whatever means possible to surprise your opponent when an accel comes or trick them into thinking youre accelerating.

Every other mechanic added is just rock paper scissors.

Knight 389 1246
  • 13 Dec
 Mittsies

@intTobey said:
The irony of a binds user saying this. Surely you know how difficult it is to consistently execute a max angle underhand or overhead with 240. Yet binds give you the advantage of performing these superior attacks with ease.

240 as a control scheme is perfectly fine, but the advantages it provides are an issue. It doesn't matter how hard you personally find 240 to be, it provides an inherent mechanical advantage. If you become comfortable enough with 240 that the control scheme doesn't hinder you anymore, then it's objectively better than binds.

Furthermore, you can use auto-hotkey to emulate a bind with any 240 angle. For instance, you could pick the most ugly-looking 240 overhead angle and make it so mousewheel down always performs that exact angle. Not only does this mean binds are essentially impossible to take out of the game, it further highlights the issues with 240 as a system.