• Likes received 9
  • Date joined 12 May
  • Last seen 12 May

Private Message

9 9
  • 12 May

Hey all - Actually? I'd like to apologize. I still stand by the majority of the statements, but the tone WAS wrong. Unfortunately, I had soaked up what the community was putting down - I came here looking for information on whether women were going to be included in the game, and was basically greeted with a tirade a toxic hatred. Relatively unpunished, at that.

Thing is, I didn't want to replicate it, it just got under my skin. Kind of hard to feel good about the community after that, you know? And with that said, I'm also not going to pretend like this is just me. I've seen some of these posters in other threads, and the hypocrisy of being indignant over my approach is palpable.

Either way, I've realized neither me nor any of you are going to be able to enjoy talking to each other right now. And those of you that are fine don't really need to see me be frustrated with the broader community, or have that frustration vented on you, instead of me simply stating preferences. To that subsection, no addendum, just sorry.

Likewise, I also realized I don't care to argue with folks who haven't actually experienced steel combat, who insist that if a game played the same way, it wouldn't be fun. That it would have to be radically different. There's a level of arrogance there that precludes having a constructive conversation.

Do whatever with this thread - I fucked it up from the get-go.

9 9
  • 12 May

Seriously chlldren, play nice and I'll be nice. Disagree and I'll talk with you. Whine, and I just won't care.

9 9
  • 12 May

@SWSeriousMike said:
I'm also for realism. When you get hit in the leg by an archer you should lie in the dirt and groan until someone with a dagger comes by and kills you.
Also each team should have an officer and as soon as the officer dies his team should run out in the fog and try to return home to their families.

Hey! Willful misreading! Aren't YOU special?

Buddy, I make concessions even when I'm talking about what I'd like to see. Why don't you take that straw man home, hmm? It's badly made, and you should feel embarrassed about it.

9 9
  • 12 May

@SerAveryLongdick said:
I agree with everything you say and have been in the same boat since I first played.
I agree that bringing more realism wouldn't be too hard as it is and it would change the game for the better for new and veteran players.

But tone down on the ego? This game is huge now and attracting everyone with an interest in what it delivers.
You are certainly not the only real steel full contact fighter picking this game up.
"I do this for real and I am better than you"
"I could kick the ass of every toon in the game"
Made me cringe hard. While we all obviously have those moments in game where we are like "Really? IRL id have put you on your ass" I hardly think shoving it I people's faces like some kind of medieval vegan is the way to go.

"Someone was confident online, but I don't think it applies to me. Rather than getting over it, I'm going to not engage with the subject matter and cherry pick to tone police."

All I hear is wah, wah, wah.

9 9
  • 12 May

@Wowzers said:
Good gameplay>realism

Reading comprehension>You

The point is they're not mutually exclusive. But thanks for playing.

9 9
  • 2
  • 12 May

@Speak said:

but I could kick the ass of every toon

stopped reading here and promptly offed myself

(I hate that word as a replacement for "character". It sounds like a cartoon character, and cartoon characters, for me, are very different from video game characters.)

Anyway the main obvious problem is that realism is not necessarily conducive to good gameplay.

I mean for fuck's sake you suggest making spears both longer and "MUCH faster."

I mean, that could happen if various other gameplay mechanics were completely overhauled to somehow make that not ridiculous and unfun, sure. Why bother?

Another obvious immediate issue is that if you made the armors more dramatically effective, people would have to carry multiple weapons (or a poleaxe haha) to be effective, which would necessitate an overhaul of the points system in order to make it easier for everyone to carry multiple weapons while still having lots of customization freedom.

Point being that you're talking about huge, fundamental changes, and what you're NOT doing is explaining how it would lead to good GAMEPLAY. You're leaving that to the devs to figure out.

Because, and let me re-emphasize this; I do this for real, and I'm better than you.

Get this, Mordhau is not a realistic medieval combat simulation. It's a video game themed around fun medieval combat. You are not an authority in this field.

And we have our first pissbaby! Congratulations.

Your concerns are "They would have to count to 16 differently" and "I would have to use a little tactical thought in my kit design to be effective".

9 9
  • 12 May

@Christian2222 said:
I don't know how I feel about the whole rock paper scissors thing about certain armor blocking certain damage types, certain armor blocking slashing, etc. It's overdone IF it is a simple damage reduction, or 100% glance hit thing.

BUT if lets say you don't land a direct stab on the full plate armor like you said, maybe it will reduce damage, or have a certain % chance to glance, lets say you land a direct hit, THEN maybe 90% of it goes through. So I am open to armors providing resistance against certain things, but not as a hard on and off switch (game mechanics years ahead of our time). Don't want to run at someone with a spear, only to see they have a stab resistant armor that glances stabs 90% of the time, and have to run away.

I was thinking more that they have heavy resistances, rather than immunity. At the end of the day, it's a video game, and skill should always let you beat your opponent. So I think we're on the same page here.

And, actually it's funny that you used a spear as an example, because of how you feel about the idea of them being speed-buffed. Would you still feel that way if heavy armor let you bully them more? Legitimate question. But you ARE right that some of the upper ends of these ideas can be fraught, but I suppose that's what balancing is for.

I like the axes dropping over shields idea, axes hit test just test as a straight line, and that is meh =/

Thanks! I started my career with an axe, because they're cheap, but they're fun as all get out against shield users who aren't ready for it. That's really ALL that's good about axes though - cheap, decent penetration, and wrap shots. Well, shield hooking, but that's not something you can really do in a game like this.

Your other suggestion was buff spears, just no to that XD

Hey, you're free to disagree, for sure. My figuring is that since thrusts are the easiest to parry, and shields are so effective against them, it wouldn't be terrible. I think with some more aggressive scaling back on damage as you get closer without choking up, it would work rather well, even. But I'm biased, and I know that.

I agree on the speed, this game needs to move a little faster, it's like everything is in slow motion.

Thanks! I'm not by any means a top-tier player, so honestly this would hurt my performance, but goodness does it feel like fighting in molasses. Running is fine, but yeah, blows come in SO slow.

Just out of curiosity, how do you feel about how small weapons flinch big two handed weapon swings when you are mid swing already?

I'm not really a fan of flinching as a mechanic AT ALL, if I'm honest. I understand the thinking behind it, and obviously it's worked well enough since Chiv that they're keeping it, but it's just not something that happens at all in a fight. I'd much rather ALL two-handed weapons have a damage falloff when you're inside their optimum range, and instead you have to make the tactical decision to block, parry, chamber or to just brawl and try to out DPS your opponent. I think the flinch mechanic is really limiting, as such.

Also, how do you feel about weapons like dagger having the same parry radius as other weapons?

Honestly, just fine. A poignard is made for the task, as is a parrying dagger (sword-breaker to most). I've found through aggression drills, fighting with a buckler and a war-knife/shortsword (2' total), that you can often defend yourself just fine. It's a different skill set, and it's active work, for sure. But I don't see a problem with it - and wouldn't mind such weapons being equipable as a "shield" if you attempt to draw one when already holding a one-handed weapon. Obviously it gives no passive cover against arrows, is the drawback there, but it's also a cheap defensive item.

Obviously, there's a question to be asked about HOLDING a parry/block with such a small, low-mass weapon against some of the big/heavy weapons in this game. Aggressive loss of stamina, and automatic disarms would be a fairly middle-ground path, but truth be told I wouldn't be against powering through guards in certain situations (Eg, trying to parry a zweihander with a dagger).

What do you fight in exactly? is it like the SCA combat?

My group is cross-discipline, so we fight in a bunch of different organizations. Including the SCA. I don't mind their stuff, but their jankiness with engagement rules from behind, and the inability to strike low targets hurt my enjoyment a little (though I admit, I DON'T want to take a halberd to the side of the knee). We've also been involved in Battle of the Nations, ACL, and other steel-on-steel disciplines. Lighter stuff, too. Basically, we just love to medieval REALLY hard - I'm just off getting my bell-rung at a practice today, in fact.

Throwing it out there randomly, when I first heard about this game I was under the impression we would have full accurate hit test, stab a part of the body with no armor, be it neck, forarm, etc, do more damage, but it was all just cosmetic, and basic damage reduction to a body part =/ And more accurate parrys / stabbing around parrys, but thats all mostly timing, with a LITTLE bit of aiming. I'm really glad they have sword clashing though, although sometimes I think I see swords hit, and they don't =/

Yeah, that was what I thought we'd been promised, too. But I admit, I'm still having lots of fun.

All the same, more-accurate hit detection paired with more a more granular armor system would be absolutely peachy. I'd say I wish we could get blade-binds, but I'm not sure if there's really a way to execute that in a satisfying way.

Thanks for joining the conversation. <3

9 9
  • 12 May

Before anything, I want you to understand, this is from the perspective of somebody who wants a good medieval game first, rather than a good game that's medieval. There are sensible concessions that need to be made for it to be enjoyable, but they're fewer than most folks tend to think.

There's some glaringly wrong stuff, like having a Coat of Plates sit in the Light category - it's the same stuff as Brigandine, in reality. Technically better, since the main differential is that brig gets it's name from brigands, who would salvage old armor to make cheap coats-of-plates. The plates within a CoP also ALWAYS overlap, whereis that's hit and miss with Brig. It's a tiny thing, but hey, we're here for the medieval, right?

I also want to briefly groan about the leather lamellar. That's mostly the realm of budget reenactors, typically under the flimsy pretense of being Varangian. That stuff likely didn't exist. But you know, they've got it over chain, so it's tolerable, even if dumb.

Mechanically speaking, I'm really disappointed with how armor is interacting with weapons. I'd really like to see medium armor (chain and above, basically) significantly dropping the output of blades, and heavier armors almost outright stopping it. I'd like to see heavy armor destroying the output of stabs, likewise. The result would be interactions that match up with reality, without complex formulae. It also gives better value and balance to a wide range of weapons, but that'll get talked about more in a bit.

Further, it's interacting really poorly with the chase mechanic. Being lightly armored doesn't mean you can outpace a more heavily armored opponent - and I say that as someone who enjoys medium to heavy kits. I like that the mechanic is there, but it currently means there's few disadvantages to heavier armor - it should be ensuring people in relatively the same kit or lighter can catch each other, not that heavily armored knights can sprint as long as they follow an archer.

Essentially, they should be interacting with armor differently. The insane damage on the executioners sword is fine, providing it doesn't really work on plate or even chain. That basically holds for all blades, be they swords or broad-axes - they should be massively deadly, but have sharp falloff against armor. That fits them into a role - fast, deadly, but unless they can MORDHAU (lol), ultimately inflexible.

Stabbing should work well against anything but heavy armors (it's the best way through maille, trust me), which not only fits it into reality, but also a role - fast, moderately versatile, moderately deadly, but with it's predictability and ease of blocking also easy enough to counter.

Which would then solve the issue of a lack of swing-through on blunt or swung, piercing weaponry (hammers, picks, maces flanged and any non-broad axe). Because then their effectiveness against heavy armor can be tuned up much higher. Yeah, mass weapons can be a little slower, yes, no swing-through limits what they can do against blocks of enemies, but it'll win you a fight versus someone in heavy armor.

In fact, it'd mean that these weapons are essentially keyed to the defensive capabilities of fighters - you cut up lightly armored foes, you stab moderately armored foes, and you bludgeon heavily armored foes. You can see that this is how the game is supposed to work, but it's just... Afraid to commit, it seems? Afraid to say make people struggle if they make poor choices.

I'd be pleased to see a bit of an uptick in speed, likewise. Obviously there still needs to be time to react, but I could kick the ass of every toon in this game with speed alone. It seems like the slow-ass swings are also there to facilitate look-dragging, which is okay to a degree. But I'd say that locking off turn arcs to about 45 degrees each side whilst committing to a blow would still allow for adjustment of swing timing, whilst better simulating footwork and allowing for a slightly faster pace of combat. This would also allow for aggressive footwork, baiting a shot, stepping outside of your opponents arc of attacks, and taking advantage. You know, like you do when you practice fighting as a martial art.

I'm DEEPLY disappointed in polearms, especially spears. The spear is my bread and butter in reality, and I can put a man twice my weight on his ass HARD with one. I do it regularly. First up, I would LOVE polearms to have a haft-check animation instead of a kick, and as such have a faster, better kick than other weapons. One you can adjust your aim better with.

Next, whilst I think the stab speed on most poles is reasonable, it needs to be MUCH faster on spears. That's the benefit of a spear, and why I choose to use one over a halberd - the lack of head-mass makes them incredibly agile weapons, and I do my work threading my spear through narrow gaps in defenses before fighters can even react.

They're also all rather janky in their lengths. I don't mind short-haft swung polearms as they stand, but I wouldn't mind long-haft options that sacrifice speed for more reach. Spears are within the realms of sanity, but also frequently came in longer lengths (and I'd love a few pike options. I don't need a 22 footer, but I wouldn't mind having a 12 footer available). Short spears, conversely, are too effectively long - the mid-grip you need to use really limits your usable length, and the rear portion of the haft fucks with your body-mechanics so you really struggle to generate anywhere near as much power. Truth be told, there's a reason you saw spear-and-shield fall-off after early antiquity. It's not good.

I also want to comment on the shortness of axes, as well. That's not universal by any stretch, and long-hafted axes are great for dropping over a shield, since the jutting blade let's you "wrap" around it into their shoulder. Likewise, it seems axe means "broad axe", and don't get me wrong, I love a nice broad axe. But give me same fast, narrow war-axes, with blades that border on pick-heads that drive through chain and penetrate deep rather than cut wide.

And for the love of sanity, nerf the hell out of a stab from an executioners sword. I shouldn't have to explain why.

Finally, let's talk about rapiers. They're 16th century weapons, so actually NOT medieval. They are hurting the experience of new, and lower skill players. They are adding nothing meaningful to the experience of veteran and moderate-to-higher skill players. If they don't make sense, hurt the aesthetic, and don't play well? ...Retire them.

As fair as aesthetics go, however? Pleased as punch.

Character options
I know it's been a source of drama thanks to the usual crowd, but straight up - the lack of women has been a bummer. I'm glad they're coming, but honestly it felt goddamn terrible and utterly alienating that the game was considered ready for release without them. I am a woman who fights. I am a woman who fights MEN. So I'm going to put something to rest, here and now - it matters in a grapple, a feature this game doesn't have. If you want to bitch and whine and moan "But mah medieval experience!", that's the truth of it.

This is about how it all fits together as a medieval game, and the team-balance issues are a dead horse.

The short of it is, they feel pretty good. A nice balance between tone and playability. However, one area where we're seeing a clash between the two is horses. Basically? These are not the environments to deploy cavalry, and it's playing weird because of it. As more maps become available, including (I hope) more field-battle style maps, I'd love to see horses retired from most of the current maps and placed into environments where they make more sense, and play better for people on both the giving and receiving end of them.

I think this is leagues ahead of Chivalry, and I'm having a great time. But, I suppose, I know what I want. And if I'm going to keep playing this once that other medieval game (that I won't name on another devs forum. Decorum) nerds like me are holding out for, I admit it'd take a move in this direction to retain me.

But hey, they got my money already, and I'm not unhappy for them to have it. So whatever complaints I have? Take 'em or leave 'em.

Oh, and don't agree? Cool, feel free to say. Leave your salt at the door though, because I'll just laugh at you for being a pissbaby. Because, and let me re-emphasize this; I do this for real, and I'm better than you.

9 9
  • 12 May

Hey, thanks for posting this. Thanks to the toxic boys on this website, all information about women was buried under a wave of misogyny. So this is the first I'm hearing/seeing of this (and it's funny AF right now, you're right).

But as a woman who fights men with swords, spears and axes? This is my most awaited feature. I was worried it wasn't going to be in the game.