Mordhau
 Naleaus
  • Likes received 875
  • Date joined 25 Oct '15
  • Last seen 5 Nov

Private Message

301 875
  • 10 Mar
 Naleaus

Have fun reading stab feints.

301 875
 Naleaus

@FaffyШaffy said:

@Pred said:

@Seseau said:
People like you are the reason why Chiv had its initial success and then failed to keep the tens of thousands of "noobs" it attracted.

Nah, Chivalry failed to keep the noobs because it made them rage at the game with all the cheese, Mordhau seems to be going the same path tbh imo.

There's been 4 months of development we don't know about, so maybe something will change, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

He's probably talking about his involvement in the comp/balance loop and how his input will result in a very flawed game.

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.

301 875
  • 27 Feb
 Naleaus

38212571_nal2.png

20048996.90000003_ven39.png

Courtesy of Bob Sapp.

301 875
  • 25 Feb
 Naleaus

A legion of horribles, hundreds in number, half naked or clad in costumes attic or biblical or wardrobed out of a fevered dream with the skins of animals and silk finery and pieces of uniform still tracked with the blood of prior owners, coats of slain dragoons, frogged and braided cavalry jackets, one in a stovepipe hat and one with an umbrella and one in white stockings and a bloodstained wedding veil and some in headgear or cranefeathers or rawhide helmets that bore the horns of bull or buffalo and one in a pigeontailed coat worn backwards and otherwise naked and one in the armor of a Spanish conquistador, the breastplate and pauldrons deeply dented with old blows of mace or sabre done in another country by men whose very bones were dust and many with their braids spliced up with the hair of other beasts until they trailed upon the ground and their horses' ears and tails worked with bits of brightly colored cloth and one whose horse's whole head was painted crimson red and all the horsemen's faces gaudy and grotesque with daubings like a company of mounted clowns, death hilarious, all howling in a barbarous tongue and riding down upon them like a horde from a hell more horrible yet than the brimstone land of Christian reckoning, screeching and yammering and clothed in smoke like those vaporous beings in regions beyond right knowing where the eye wanders and the lip jerks and drools.

301 875
  • 25 Feb
 Naleaus

Rob, you're a white whale.

301 875
  • 21 Feb
 Naleaus

@Q said:
Honestly, the best way to improve 1vX (& combat in general) would be the addition of same-side combos. Combos are the most overlooked mechanic in this entire genre. However, I would say they are just as important (if not more) than all the other mechanics.

How the fuck are same side combos going to stop someone from just flinching your ass? The issue isn't combos, it's FHF (which current riposte takes care of), lack of reverses to pressure people behind you, lunge, release parry, etc. And really, they're not so much issues as such, they just make 1vX really difficult.

Also:

With feints/morphs/chambers/drags/accel becoming the only way to really win.

This is hilarious. Combos fix everything, without them you only have 5 other mechanics you have to use to win! When you only NEED same side combos!

301 875
  • 21 Feb
 Naleaus

@Lionheart Chevalier said:
Spinning and reverses are alive and well at least in NA duelyards... not that anything can realistically be done about this.

So there's a change that should fix some of the more egregious reverse type attacks in the pipeline next patch. In general they were situational regardless, but they look pretty shit so I'm glad they'll be gone. Only took like a year of doing them.

301 875
  • 8 Feb
 Naleaus

@Pred said:

@Cswic said:

@Pred said:

@Cswic said:

@Pred said:

@machinegod said:
I get that binds are better but as long as 240 exists some people will use it and therefore we should try to make it more consistent.

It's one input method for two different actions (attacks and torso movement), it's never going to be super reliable.

It can be if they want it to be. They can implement a 6 attack 240 system version where each 40 degree angle range is the same attack.

E.g. Right Overhead (like the angle that a bound right overhead uses) is angle 0 degree to 40 degree.

Having 6 set attack angles bound to 6 more generous angle ranges would help 240 feel more consistent than the current iteration, imo.

That was my idea as well, but we got a semi-official response semi-indicating this is not happening. So it is what it is I guess.

Happen to remember who the semi-official response was from? Wouldn't surprise me if that was the case honestly.

Jax, I think on two separate occasions. It was something along the lines of "we won't have six animations because there is already a system which has 240".

His idea isn't to remove the procedural animations entirely, just make it so that if you use 240 it does the exact angles you'd get from binds instead of in-between. So no new animations required.

301 875
  • 7 Feb
 Naleaus

Doesn't need to do much damage, just annoy the heavy, and if they come to get me I have a weakened enemy and an arming sword or better. Plus I can piss off actual archers. And I'm a terrible shot.

301 875
  • 2 Feb
 Naleaus

@yourcrippledson said:
I know that the auto ftp bind wasn't planned to be used in tandem with normal ftp, because i was the one who suggested making it a bind instead of a checkbox in the first place lol...

What? You could always use it in tandem with normal FTP. Feint with Q, Parry with RMB. The bind just allows you to set it up like Chiv for feint to parry with RMBx2, which is slower than q > rmb.

301 875
  • 1 Feb
 Naleaus

If you know they rely soley on insta FTP/CFTP, this just makes punishing them easier, as they will press the button early as shit and leave themselves open. Good players will use both the one button and q => rmb, and will be harder to punish regardless.

301 875
  • 31 Jan
 Naleaus

@Mittsies said:
Due to how latency works in this game, making a macro to attack as late as possible would be very unreliable, you'd probably have to make it happen a bit earlier to compensate for ping and all that.

Can confirm, tested feint windows with a macro at various pings, even a slight fluctuation would cause the macro to fail if set to the latest timing possible for that ping.

301 875
  • 24 Jan
 Naleaus

@idiotgod said:

@Naleaus said:

@idiotgod said:

@Naleaus said:
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.

It's really not a lot of possibilities. It's the same fucking possibilities that exist at any other moment in combat that you didn't just out-play your opponent in a very blatant way through footwork and timing.

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.

But I already made the play. Why do I have to make a play to gain initiative to have a chance to make a play? That is just an extra step. The play I made should be good enough to land a hit, but I still have to make you fall for a feint instead? It's stupid...

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.

301 875
  • 24 Jan
 Naleaus

@idiotgod said:

@Naleaus said:
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.

It's really not a lot of possibilities. It's the same fucking possibilities that exist at any other moment in combat that you didn't just out-play your opponent in a very blatant way through footwork and timing.

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.

301 875
  • 24 Jan
 Naleaus

@Frise said:
Getting to morph/feint/drag to punish a whiff is not a punish, it's just getting initiative back, since the whiffer can combo-feint and start reading. Conceptually, it also turns interesting plays into more of what the combat already revolves too much around. And as we learnt from Chivalry and shields in this game, balancing through stamina is a boring approach to combat design.

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.

301 875
  • 24 Jan
 Naleaus

@Frise said:

@rob_owner said:
i think i value training over intuition. Accept the rules of whatever fighting environment, so it doesnt matter what scenario you give.

That's completely beyond the point. This discussion's point is to make the game better by making the combat intuitive. It's not about complaining vs adapting, it's about providing feedback during the alpha to improve the game, because that's the fucking point of the alpha.

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.

301 875
  • 25 Dec '18
 Naleaus

@idiotgod said:

@Naleaus said:

I'd rather just have timing based instead.

Lucky for us Marox doesn't agree.

What, you're saying Marox wants all the silly shit from Chiv? Of course you're not, cause you took a single line out of context and made a useless post.

301 875
  • 1
  • 24 Dec '18
 Naleaus

@Lionheart Chevalier said:
The entire idea of a purely timing based, static parry was a horrible idea. I dare you all to try defending it.

A few things. Spinning is viable against bad players and in duels only. You don't do that shit against players that will punish you, and you definitely don't do it in team fights. Currently, starting attacks inside of opponents with slashes is really strong, which looks a bit like spinning but is really just stupid accels.

As for defending a time based parry, fighting shields is fucking boring. Fighting shields when they were worse than parries was boring because I was still forced to do obscene drags to get around them somewhat consistently. It was one dimensional and slows shit down to a crawl.

If instead you were wanting a system like mount and blade where you have angle your block to match the attack angle, that leads to even more spastic fights. I watch their duels and start worrying that the players are having seizure symptoms.

If you just mean that you want to be able to get around parries easier without resorting to timing, sure, but it has to be done in moderation. They want to avoid obscene drags or ruining team fights. Marox already suggested they'll look into more. But I don't want to do the silly shit from Chiv. I don't want to drag a stab windup through someone to stab their other side, hit toes cause a guy can't see where the attack actually is in relation to their character cause of 1st, etc. I'd rather just have timing based instead.

301 875
  • 24 Dec '18
 Naleaus

@vanguard

I wrote up some big reply and forgot to post it. But the gist was that I do not really have those issues, whether it's cause of a different setup (angle before or after, mouse, playstyle, etc) or something else. Obviously I have incorrect inputs occasionally, but it's rare enough that I don't get pissed off. And I do wacky footwork and matrix shit nonstop (less wacky in team games though).

This isn't to refute what you've said, but just to give a different viewpoint that not everyone has the same issue with it. I know Stauxie uses full 240 and does well, so that may be another person to look at in regards to differences in experiences with it.

301 875
  • 1
  • 23 Dec '18
 Naleaus

@vanguard said:
240 system still is a absolute pain in the ass to make work properly in the heat of the combat. I give up on it tbh, it simply isn't worth it, I won't expend a thousand hours just to master fucking attack imput, this is inconceivable. I honestly recomend you guys give binds as the default option for everyone, and leave the 240 system as a cool gimick for noobs or masochists idk, because when you play against someone that knows what to do, this system puts you in such disadvantage it isn't even funny.

While it's not as good as straight binds, I don't have nearly as much issue as you seem to with 240. Granted I only use it for slashes and underhands, and mostly just for chambering, but I truly really don't have complaints about it in general use.