To help personalize content, gather statistics and provide a safer experience, we use cookies.
By clicking or navigating the site, you agree to allow our collection of information through cookies.
Learn more about cookies in our
Cookies Policy and
Privacy Policy.
https://steamcommunity.com/app/629760/discussions/0/2530372519578320898/
If you're looking at their health in the box after you die, you get health on kill. If you want to see what damage something does to each armor type, open a loadout, equip the weapon, then press the Advanced button. Damages are consistent with what's shown there.
It gets said everytime. Morph, drag, feint, just hit them to get stamina advantage.
They also adjusted parry size/positioning. I've been able to waterfall again this patch again with varying degrees of success. Stab drags work pretty well for me. Stab itself doesn't need a lot of changes to make them readable. Increasing windup will help the instant feeling, decreasing feint windows will make reading easier. An animation change could negate the need for either or work in conjunction.
Any adjustments to 1vX will be a band aid. With base mechanics, 1vX will be hard as fuck. You can increase parry lockout, bandaid. HA, bandaid. Easy parry buff, band aid.
Chiv had huge fucking parries that let you crouch and lookup to the sky gods, who would answer your prayers by letting your ass parry for you, and reverses which enabled a nice circle around you as dangerous. Plus shit 2 frame animations. It's sort of broken base mechanics allowed stuff like that, while Mordhau's don't.
Also, I like teamfights at the moment compared to when we had HA. Still wish we got to test AP again though.
I agree, everyone has been waiting at this point. Unfortunately, balance/mechanic testing has been stuck behind content/engine updates, etc. I don't know the specific reasoning for it, but would have been nice to have separate experimental branch. I can't blame Crush for it, cause he's at the mercy of the other devs. Can blame him for animations though.
However, I don't think mechanic changes will stop after release. Balancing obviously will continue too. Maybe we can get a opt in test build after release.
I also like the game currently. Obviously it can be better, there's always things to be improved, but I'll be playing at release and enjoying it as is.
You'd prefer Jax, who is for better or worse a company man to give you a spiel? All I did was post what I've seen discussed as far as changes and give my opinions. It's not limited to a specific inner circle of people.
I like the game and like the state it's in. There are things I want changed and I touched on some of them. If that's a problem, let me know and I'll attack your opinion.
Ok so you're just going to not comment on coming changes and rewrite what you wrote the first time.
Besides your title's hyperbole (you know balance updates won't stop after release), I'll go through a few things I know are either tentative, are in the pipeline or have been discussed.
Stabs:
Tentatively, stab animation update and possibly separate, slightly nerfed feint/morph windows for stabs are in the pipeline.
We've suggested to start with 25ms windup increase and 50ms feint window decrease. But changes are coming at some point so just gotta wait and see.
Shields:
I personally think they really require mechanic changes, and I assume marox is busy with other stuff. Either way, as long as they're not entirely OP or weak at release, it'll be ok for awhile.
1vX:
Tentative easy parry riposte buff in the pipeline, plus some other mechanics to help punish purposely missed attacks.
The easy parry one would be a buffed riposte (still up in air on specific buff, could be damage, speed, knockback, etc) after you do a parry into parry, riposte into parry or chamber into parry. This would help with your chamber desire as well.
Again, an actual mechanic change, so I assume will come when programmers can get to them.
Weapon variety:
I disagree partially with everything feeling the same. I think some categories/weapon types feel similar, which make sense to me. But an estoc doesn't feel like a battle axe which doesn't feel like a spear which doesn't feel like a warhammer.
And there are weapons like exec and maul which are played very differently from others. Plus blunt weapons having hitstop. Waraxe is also very fun with it's fast combos, which makes it feel different to battle axe.
I think some of the sameness comes from timings/releases not lasting forever like Chiv, and from using the procedural animations. Not much to be done about that though.
This isn't necessarily a defense, just my thoughts and what I have seen discussed. Balance wise the game is in probably the best spots it's been, so I'm happy mostly.
We used spikes and funneled bots into them, then at the end took a shield dude for a walk while people fixed stuff and bought items. They're not hard to kill, you can force them into trying to attack out of range very easily then punish.
Random projectiles were the most difficult part till end rounds. More bot behavior variance would be nice.
I didn't have the issues with not getting into games. Once I got in an active server, it was a pretty quick loop of playing till death/win then switching to the new server where everyone else was waiting for game start. I have an SSD so load in game quickly, but I definitely saw some others having issues loading in late.
As for gameplay, I had a lot of fun with it and liked it more than FL, and I hate BR games. I think at the moment the most skilled players will have the most fun. Once the playerbase isn't sweaty tryhards mixed in with others, it should even out somewhat for everyone. It's pretty easy to get to the end game just avoiding fights and scavenging stuff near the end, but the games weren't full earlier.
Are the chests in the dungeon affected by your graphics settings? I could instantly tell after a round or so which were real and which were fake just by the look of them.
Because they don't need extra players to fill a few servers. All extra players would do is force them to commit to specific server hosts and setups before they've been tested. Why pay for a bunch of stuff before you know it's going to work?
Imagine thinking stab animations will ever be readable or thinking anything like that will change before release, or that removing chambers altogether will be healthy for a game where they're used as a soft read for feints or to pressure when you don't have initiative. Imagine thinking that making parrying more difficult will lead to enjoyable team combat when parry is already shit to begin with. Imagine having a chin.
Have fun reading stab feints.
Cept he's wrong anyway cause Giru wasn't involved in Chivalry's early days and TBS DIDN'T listen to comp/good player balance early on and subsequently lost most of the their comp players by making the game pretty shit for almost a year.
People quit Chiv cause it was unbalanced, buggy as hell and hard to get into after people started getting good, and not because of people on the forums. As for in game toxicity, it's going to be 100 times as bad this once it releases.
Most of the people offering actual balance criticisms do so from a perspective of "Will this be good for the health of the game?" and not just "Hurrdurr skill ceiling." You want to have both. Assuming his feedback will result in a flawed game is pretty subjective, since you're assuming that all his feedback is listened to and that something you might not like is flawed in the first place.
You made a play to get initiative. Footwork doesn't do damage. Except kicks I guess.
And against bad players, someone that fucked up and didn't combo, or someone with a weapon that can't combo, that play would probably be enough. Except they could still footwork you, matrix, etc.
That's a different issue. It's not that the possibilities don't exist, it's that you don't like them, which is fine. You outplayed your opponent through footwork and timing, you're rewarded with initiative without using stam through parrying to do so. Once you have initiative, it's up to you to make the play.
The morph/feint/drag is the counter to the counter. The original punish is attacking their miss. They counter with CFTP, you counter with a morph/drag/feint. However they could instead just combo feint and read as you said, which is a counter to your counter. It's a lot of possibilities and the back and forth of initiative seems more interesting to me than just taking damage because of a timing nerf.
There's two ways to look at intuitive in this situation. One is what they see visibly when attacking someone that misses. The other is what they know is possible through extension of the mechanics in the game.
Preferably you'd want both without diluting either. In this instance though, I'd lean more towards the mechanics taking precedent, as punishes do exist and very much work. The animation could maybe be changed without affecting timings to better denote the difference in vulnerability between entering recovery and comboing, but there's always going to be some that appear instant or whatever.
I personally don't think there needs to be more punishment for missing than there already is. I also don't have much issue with matrixing and other dodges not being rewarded more.
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.
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.
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.