Mordhau
 daWASTI
Mercenary
  • Likes received 83
  • Date joined 28 Jan '17
  • Last seen 16 Dec

Private Message

Mercenary 45 83
  • 3
  • 14 Nov
 daWASTI

In my eyes this problem stems from keyframes that need to be stretched out. One can surprise with incredibly fast attacks even later in the release, because certain parts of the release speed up too much while the rest is fairly slow. The perfect example for this is Battle Axe, which can be seen in a little clip i recorded at 48 ping (netcode is another big issue that comes into play in reading attacks)

As you can see one can easily exploit these faster parts of the release by draging for a certain amount of time and then speeding the attack up at the right time.

Another easy fix for instahits in the early release would be to add more turncap to the windup such that accels look more like they should and surprise less.

Mercenary 45 83
  • 1
  • 11 May
 daWASTI

@GIRUGIRU said:

That being said, there are items in the works to increase the skill cap still within the game, and to buff 1vX (and chambers in 1vX for that regard), so i'm not saying the devs should give up on combat balance and polish entirely. But when these changes are done it's extremely important that the lower level spectrum of the game is not affected adversely as a result

I'm glad we're on the same page with that Skill ceiling increase is something that can be taken on later still and the ideas that I presented are just concepts out of many options there are. We have to be careful to just add on top, but not affect the casual playstyle too much, which is except for maybe little tweaks on a good way overall. I think DCF with 0 stam, but leaving the recovery as it is, could already be implemented soon to give chambering more value in duel situations. Just an extra timing to detect DCF and a change of the stam cost.

Then there are still the ideas about asymmetrical clashing to take the place of the old active parry(regardless of what input has to be made for it, can aswell be like before, just a chamber and in a certain window after it asymmetrical clashing happens), but I think we should just get on discord and discuss that there.

Mercenary 45 83
  • 5
  • 11 May
 daWASTI

You're right about the recovery on DCF, 0 might be gone too far. On the other hand ... DCF is meant to look like almost nothing animation wise and should therefor by the timings not be much different from parrying an attack and then riposting. I don't know how long the lockout is on riposte atm ... I think we will have to find a good balance between possible offensive use of DCF follow-ups and the usability of chain-chambering with that timing. It might be worth a try to implement and then experiment with the exact timings of it, but I'm quite confident, that it is possible to go down from the normal feint recovery on DCF quite significantly. In addition I had another idea to make the success of a DCF with 0 stam dependent on how much the player moved his camera after the chamber connected and before he DCFed, in order to directly put a cap on how agressive it can look(while not restricting the movement of course).

I totally agree on keeping inputs as simple as possible, hence why I think chambering needs a structural buff, but can't be made much more difficult and rewarding as a one time action. The concept of chain parrying outside active-parry is already in the game though and chain-active-parrying shouldn't be that much of an additional difficulty ... depending on the exact implementation again of course.

Mercenary 45 83
  • 9
  • 10 May
 daWASTI

@GIRUGIRU said:
defensive chamber feint is cool as an idea aslong as the timing is extremely strict (so it's only used at high level). However, i disagree with low feint recovery on a small chamber feint as it would allow for absolutely brutal mixups, essentially allowing you to switch your successful chamber into any direction accel/drag, a feint, a morph accel/drag or a morph feint

I'm glad you agree on DCF with 0 stam being a good idea, I can explain again why 0 recovery is needed aswell and no problem at all. No recovery makes chain-chambering in teamfights/ 1vX a thing and gives highly skilled players a chance of defence without stamina ... for 1-3 seconds maybe, because on the same skill level you will NEVER see a guy do chain-chambering in 1vX for very long.

Now why does 0 recovery not destroy anything and doesn't have any impact on offense? Because it's not faster than anything that is in the game so far ... in fact the speed of a follow-up is exactly in the place where it should be if you have 0 recovery. It is still faster to chamber through(windup doesn't get restarted and also chamber has faster swing manipulation ... a follow-up to DCF is a normal attack). But at the same time if you set DCF equal with just another option to parry attacks then the follow-up to a DCF becomes something like a "chamber-riposte". In any case ... DCF with 0 recovery doesn't produce new attacks that are faster than what already exists and are in speed in fact limited by what you define as the speed of chambers. Not that big offensive use other than the freedom of directional choice that you get on a riposte aswell(hence why I called it "chamber-riposte").

The stamina cost of other defence options has to be adjusted then. Easy-parrying fullfills exactly the same purpose as chain-chambering through DCF. From a balancing perspective I would say that the 0 stam defence place should be reserved for the most skillfull option, which would be chain-chambering then. Therefor easy-parrying should cost something, but of course still less than a normal parry ... I would say 25% or 20%.

@GIRUGIRU said:
while i agree there should be buffs to offense in mordhau, buffing chambers as an offensive tool is not a good option. Chambers are already currently the best way to bypass parry, buffing chambers even more means that chamber-centric playstyles become incredibly strong and defensive "pussy" playstyles also benefit as a result, allowing for a For Honor style meta rather than a brutal offensive meta

I can't really agree there. The addition of chain-chambering through DCF and some kind of active-parry on it wouldn't enhance it's offensive use too much. DCF has no offensive impact as i pointed out and active-parry ... well we will have to find an option, there are quite many ideas to choose from now. And buffing chambers in 1vX wouldn't really hurt either as there is no use of it in 1vX at all right now, except if the X are quite passive and one of them is really low and attacks you so that you could get a quick kill in.

I also very much have to disagree on the "pussy" defence part as it is very risky to attempt chain-chamber-feinting in 1vX against players that know atleast a bit about swing manipulation.

If the asymmetrical clash version of active parry gets implemented, then the offensive use of this AP would be quite little.

@GIRUGIRU said:
As for active parry, the conclusion was made to get rid of active parry as it's an "ugly" solution to buff 1vX, it allows attackers to spam into an active parry and immediately parry the subsequent attack themselves (which makes 1vX a case of dealing with X amount of spammers and a whole lot of feint-to-parrying, at high level).

That is something regarding the old active parry. If you would call alternative options active parry or not ... something needs to take its place for chambering. Chain-chambering is completely defensive and would only fill the place of easy-parries for the chamber playstyle. Something needs to be there, similar to trades for the riposte/parry playstyle, but I wouldn't want trades there aswell. I think chambering should remain something risky throughout every way in that it plays out in the game and the rewards need to be consequently there but subtle and balanced. Therefor I would want something like active parry that is flinchable, but has some sort of offensive and defensive use in 1vX.

@GIRUGIRU said:
Ontop of that, active parry is not freindly for newer players. 95% of players that touch Mordhau will never even understand the basics of the realtime swing system (windup-release-recovery) let alone understand active parry, this is a problem and this is a big factor in the reasoning why it was removed.

There are three aspects in which I think the old active-parry needs to be shifted or something new taking its place. That are

  • The usability: it should become quite a bit harder to use than just riposting or chambering and spinning
  • The visual implementation: Even total beginners should be able to see that they got outplayed
  • The offensive use: The mix between offence and defence needs to be more balanced, the old AP had too much offensive use in my opinion(spam heavy)

The first point can be adressed if you introduce my idea of active-chain-parrying with E or some other button required to be pressed on each parried attack, while the whole active parry fails if you miss one of the attacks, then this would be something that doesn't touch the casual gameplay at all. You will not find active parrying on lower skill levels and even on higher it would be something that is not at all easy to perform. Again ... chamber playstyle is something risky and difficult to perform, but these chances need to be there in order to bring any interest into the game after 500h of playtime.

The second and third point are something that could be handled by the idea of asymmetrical clashing.

@GIRUGIRU said:
I disagree with the return of active parry in any form, it was tried and tested, and removed for a reason. I would have implemented active parry in compmod if it were possible, but it's just not an ideal mechanic for Mordhau. There are other buffs to 1vX regarding chambers in the works, i would wait to see how that turns out.

I would love to debate these other options then and see what could be better, share your knowledge with us. As I said, wether you call our ideas active parry or not, they're not the old active parry and should be debated properly again. I already went through Monsteri's list of criteria with it, but let me know what you think about that:

@daWASTI said:
I will first explain what it is and then go through your criteria of evaluating AP(which is a quite good list I think, well done).
Our idea is to change the way it plays out for the X. There are three cases how the X can act in this scenario:


1) Attacking into it: These players will get parried(deflected) with a spark and a little sound … the AP slips through and goes further, while the attackers just get parried, but not damaged. Spark and sound … basically what I would call an asymmetrical clash. The AP acts like it clashed(but doesn’t get reset, attack goes further), while the X just get parried and can’t combo out of it.

2) Parrying it: In this case the X will of course also not get hit, but the attack doesn’t stop … again it will slip through with a spark and a sound for it.

3) Not doing anything: These players will get damaged by the AP.


Going then through your list of criteria with that:


1) No visual cue: The sparks and slipping sound will provide that, they can be taken from the current clash animation set(maybe, but I’m of course not an expert on that).

2) The X parrying after active parried: This problem is solved inherently. Anyone that acted in any way, defensively or aggressively, will be put on the defence in the same way, where the ones that parried(or ftped) the AP have the advantage of the possibility of chain-parry afterwards(XvX), while the attackers are in the state of gotten parried.

3) Esoterism: No smackdowns, no random attack cancelling. Should feel like getting either clashed or just normally attacked, depending on the reaction on the receiving end.

4) Inconsistency: Of course we haven’t seen that in action yet and we don’t know how the devs would implement it … but by the concept it should be a very consistent mechanic, as it acts exactly like any normal other attack does already: either getting clashed(asymmetrically) or getting attacked. Only concern in the implementation could be the hitbox of it, I’m not sure if the clash hitbox is consistent enough for it and taking a guess I would say it has to be a bit bigger as the current clash hitbox, but surely not as massive as the old AP one.

5) Crutch: How spammy it will work out we will have to see … and there is still the option of adding what I proposed earlier with the active-chain-parry aswell to make it a mechanic that isn’t quite as easy to use to begin with.


If you think through how that would look and act like, I would say that is pretty accurate in realism as well. Just a sword that slips through many incoming attacking swords. Also if you would combine it with chain-active-parry on the input side, it would differentiate it from the normal symmetrical clashing ... could feel like putting in a little bit of "strength" in the strike to be the one that slips through and not the one that gets parried, but that's just a side node that could be quite nice^^


@Monsteri said:
@GIRUGIRU I don't fault you for not wanting to read all these short novellas with full attention, but read this much:

I think in order to really discuss on the matter you should first take the time and understand fully what it is^^ I'm sorry if it is very textheavy, I'm happy to debate that in voice-chat aswell.

Mercenary 45 83
  • 2
  • 10 May
 daWASTI

@Monsteri said:
Pressing RMB to time it is a weak fix, and a confusing one. I wanted to FTP, why did nothing happen?

I get the problem with this concerning my active-chain-parry idea: The old AP worked consistently throughout windup and a little bit into release if I'm not wrong. Now with the requirement of pressing RMB you get the problem in the windup phase that the game will not know if you want to do a FTP or an AP. Two solutions:

  • Add ripost-chambering ... would simply close the circle of mechanics, if you have to parry during windup, you do a simple FTP, if you want to continue with a chain-chamber afterwards you can turn it to use as chamber. If the old ripost feint gets added back aswell, you could after the ripost continue riposting and then FTP again if you wanted. Total freedom of choice which I don't see any problem with ... just like my concept of chain-chambering AP would be something that inherently follows out of our set of base-mechanics and isn't a real mechanic itself.

  • Just make a new bind for AP ... pressing E on each attack during AP instead of RMB, to not mix up FTP and AP during windup(Rag's idea)

My idea of the asymmetrical clashing AP could be done in various ways. You could cut it off at the end to not do AP with footdrags, but the clashing AP could surely last longer as the old one as it will have less hitbox and offensive use, apart from the skill requirement if you add chain-active-parry into it.

On another note it is debatable if active-parry then should be totally flinchable, which I am for. It is connected to the chamber-branch of mechanics and should therefor be a risky and rewarding move. But surely you could also combine it with no flinch, or with only flinch by hitting in the back(which I think should be implemented on ripostes anyways, no flinch at all doesn't only look stupid, it is also even less intuitive than people said about the old AP).

So there you go ... that is quite a variety of concept-pieces that you can build a new and better chamber AP from.

I pretty much put out everything I have in mind regarding chambering and the combat mechanics now. Wether any of it gets taken or not ... I'm looking forward to the modding tools^^

Mercenary 45 83
  • 7
  • 10 May
 daWASTI

So here we have the DCF demonstration(I have more footage from different angles if you need it). I short I think this should atleast cost 0 stam in any case, since its nothing but a more skilled parry. In addition I propose 0 recovery so that a really good player can use that to chamber multiple incoming attacks (chain-chamber-feinting). This would add more depth to the stam-pool game in teamfights I think.

@vanguard ... this is what it looks and sounds like(really just a cling and not agressive looking). You can also see that I used it to act passively in order to preserve stam(if 0 stam gets implemented) while my teammate is the agressor. This shouldn't really make anyone panic though.

@Monsteri said:
Pressing RMB to time it is a weak fix, and a confusing one. I wanted to FTP, why did nothing happen?

Very good point. I worked out more ideas and issues regarding my version of active parry on chambering in a conversation with @Comeandsee ... I will write that down here tomorrow I guess.

Mercenary 45 83
 daWASTI

Great ideas @Monsteri, thanks for the input. Me and @MrRag actually came up with a totally new idea of how to twist AP, but I will get into that later.

First about the DCF

I think it's (sadly, I'm not a fan of too much dynamic stuff and exceptions either) needed to differentiate them from aggressively used chamber feints:

1) If you just completely remove stamina cost on it again, it will firstly become a very cheesy and casual-unfriendly method to take 1h time of practicing stab chambering and using that to do some nasty stab-chamber-morph-feints to destroy your mates that just don't have the skill yet to chamber or read enough (would create the same gap as you had in chiv ... Q was very easy to use, but bone-hard to defend against for quite some time). It is of course not that cheesy, since chamber-morphing can easily be practiced with some mates and doesn't take too long in order to read chamber morph feints, but 0 stam on chamber feints will just enforce that. Apart from that the skill it takes to execute a chamber feint is not that massively more than to do a normal feint to make it cost 0 stam. I think we should be careful on going into the extremes too easy, although I would support a cost reduction to maybe half of the normal feint cost.

2) And secondly, I think it adds a lot of colour and should be at the heart of the game: freedom of choice as much as possible. If you remove recovery on the aggressive looking chamber-feints … then you basically remove the other options of dealing with them other than directly reading or gambling them, which are: footwork and double-parrying. I really wouldn’t like to mess with the freedom of choice on dealing with feints. Feint-defence is a thing that we should be very careful about as we know what happened in chiv. In chiv I was due to bad connection and just not enough experience for a very long time a player that couldn’t directly read most feints, but I became quite successful in working my way around the punish through footwork, jumping and matrixing. Also from a viewer’s perspective: I don’t think it’s very exciting to watch moments where you can be 100% sure “oh he’s definitely fucked now” … it needs to be at least 99% to make incredible come-backs a thing(that’s why I’m also not a huge fan of stunning on kicks, but that’s another thing)

So I’m afraid that we will have to divide the two :P I’m very glad though, that I’m not the only one that would love to see chain-chambering in epic Twitch-clips or tryhard enough to get them working for myself.

Overall I think we shouldn't aim towards a chamber being a rare thing. It almost can't be for two reasons:

  • the time window can't be ridiculously small for netcode reasons
  • the swing manipulation can't be ridiculously hard to read for realism reasons

So chambers will happen quite often. Now I definitely agree, that the reward for getting a chamber off here and there shouldn't be that high. But something like consistent chambering should be embraced through mechanics as chain-chamber-feinting and adequately rewarded.

Now about AP

My idea with making AP something that requires performing chain-parrying during the strike is something that only regards the players input. Me and Rag had a new idea that is about how it plays out for the ones at the receiving end. So in the end I hope we can all throw our ideas of how to make AP better in different aspects together and from that combined build a new one.

I will first explain what it is and then go through your criteria of evaluating AP(which is a quite good list I think, well done).
Our idea is to change the way it plays out for the X. There are three cases how the X can act in this scenario:


1) Attacking into it: These players will get parried(deflected) with a spark and a little sound … the AP slips through and goes further, while the attackers just get parried, but not damaged. Spark and sound … basically what I would call an asymmetrical clash. The AP acts like it clashed(but doesn’t get reset, attack goes further), while the X just get parried and can’t combo out of it.

2) Parrying it: In this case the X will of course also not get hit, but the attack doesn’t stop … again it will slip through with a spark and a sound for it.

3) Not doing anything: These players will get damaged by the AP.


Going then through your list of criteria with that:


1) No visual cue: The sparks and slipping sound will provide that, they can be taken from the current clash animation set(maybe, but I’m of course not an expert on that).

2) The X parrying after active parried: This problem is solved inherently. Anyone that acted in any way, defensively or aggressively, will be put on the defence in the same way, where the ones that parried(or ftped) the AP have the advantage of the possibility of chain-parry afterwards(XvX), while the attackers are in the state of gotten parried.

3) Esoterism: No smackdowns, no random attack cancelling. Should feel like getting either clashed or just normally attacked, depending on the reaction on the receiving end.

4) Inconsistency: Of course we haven’t seen that in action yet and we don’t know how the devs would implement it … but by the concept it should be a very consistent mechanic, as it acts exactly like any normal other attack does already: either getting clashed(asymmetrically) or getting attacked. Only concern in the implementation could be the hitbox of it, I’m not sure if the clash hitbox is consistent enough for it and taking a guess I would say it has to be a bit bigger as the current clash hitbox, but surely not as massive as the old AP one.

5) Crutch: How spammy it will work out we will have to see … and there is still the option of adding what I proposed earlier with the active-chain-parry aswell to make it a mechanic that isn’t quite as easy to use to begin with.


If you think through how that would look and act like, I would say that is pretty accurate in realism as well. Just a sword that slips through many incoming attacking swords. Also if you would combine it with chain-active-parry on the input side, it would differentiate it from the normal symmetrical clashing ... could feel like putting in a little bit of "strength" in the strike to be the one that slips through and not the one that gets parried, but that's just a side node that could be quite nice^^

This ideas has some flaws that I will work out the next days aswell, but they might be fixable. On the other hand I personally am all for just re-adding the old chamber AP with more time on it and maybe a bit less angle to make it look less "unintuitive", because other than the fact that it was too easy to perform with ripostes and therefor spammy(especially how it worked out with light armour footwork and large weapons) I never had a problem with AP in general. Never found it unintuitive, atleast not more than zero flinch on riposts and glancing blows. The old AP was a decent reward for the risk of chambering in a teamfight.

Slowly I feel like we could get somewhere here^^ Thank you again for your input
And btw, please remove my previous reply @Monsteri, I totally got you wrong there.

Should active parry be brought back as asymmetrical clashing?

bolded text

Mercenary 45 83
 daWASTI

@Monsteri said:
Bad idea, it's complicated and dumbs things down a lot

@Monsteri said:
So you get put into a state where you can attack but you can't parry? Nowhere else in the game. A state that is disabled after it is used once.

Why would it dumb things down? One option instead of... nine. What's the point in feinting the chamber when the opponent doesn't even have the option of parrying? He's always going to attempt a counter chamber, rendering the feint useless.

What happens in teamfights? One guy gets chambered, now he can't parry an attack coming from elsewhere, he's arbitrarily required to chamber it.

I don't think you've thought this through.

I think you haven't understood the proposed changes at all and I don't like that you already give your final answer then.

@daWASTI said:

If anything is not explained well enough, feel free to ask questions before you take your vote

It's not quite easy to explain this perfectly understandable and I went rather for explicity and detailed descriptions than quick understanding in my post. I'm currently working on video material, maybe a little chart and a better answer to you and to vanguard. Don't worry I'll explain it clearer, give me some time^^

@vanguard said:
I really like the idea of defensive chambering to preserve stamina, but the hard thing is to not make it scarry. As far as I understand, chamber animation is basically the windup right, and so are feints in general. If we make chamber feints less scarry, then maybe feints overall could end up being less scarry as well because they share animations.

Also, it would be naturally scarry because imagine 1v2, you are the 1. As soon as you hear the chambering noise from one of your opponents, brother, the chance you will panic parry is exactly 76.3% I did the math man. Basically its fucking scarry anyways because you will be dividing your attention between 2 people, and noises are something we use to react to stuff and a chamber noise in a 2v1 is scarry as fuck.

Mercenary 45 83
  • 8 May
 daWASTI

Ah yes I forgot to mention ... I will be doing the in-game voices for Mordhau

Mercenary 45 83
  • 8 May
 daWASTI

@Void said:
I understand though that combat mechanics must be finalized at some point and I don't know how much room is left for experimentation. I hope that a good balance can be found before release, so both skilled players and newbies will be happy. Fine-tuning of course can continue even after release.

Thanks for your feedback ... The good thing is: except maybe a little animation on the active parry part to make it look better, everything is already there and doesn't really have to be made completely new. The DCF is basically just a timing and a few tweaks to stamina cost and recovery. And even the animtion for chain-active-parry could maybe be taken from the ripost animation set as RingMaster pointed out. Not that big development behind it overall, but I think it could have very positive effects on the combat system^^

Mercenary 45 83
 daWASTI

@RingMaster said:
Like that sounds hard as balls to defend on the recieving end of a chamber active parry but i think that also should be the point, outnumbered/teamfighting is crazy so if someone actually pulls off a chamber they should be rewarded for it.

Probably not even that hard to defend against, since it would in theory still play out as the same active parry as it was before ... just a more skilled version of it. If the guy doing that uses a weapon like Zweihander and you stand far enough away from it, you will still be able to get active parried, but then parry yourself.

Another idea: You could add the insta-parrying as you have on hits now aswell to this active-parry. So that active-parry really just forces people on the defensive, but if the X are good they are still able to not get hit by it quite easily. Would look a bit like this:

I think it could definitely raise the pace of teamfights on a higher skill level again to where it used to be ... while not really affecting the casual level at all. If insta-parrying on that is implemented tho, then you have to look into the stamina cost of this version of active parry very closely, since it should still have some stamina advantage over using your standard parry window and just blocking multiple hits with it. On the other hand you could again argue, that knowing when to use normal parry and when to use active-chain-parry or even chain-chambering is exactly the skill this is going for. These are meant as very risky moves that bring some colour to teamfights.

Mercenary 45 83
  • 8 May
 daWASTI

@a_squire said:
when you say “removal of active parry” do you mean that you dont have to be looking at their weapon at all to block? that its solely a timing thing?

No that would be horrible. I saw on another thread that you don't have the game yet ... "active parry" was a mechanic that let you deflect other attacks with your own attack while being in a riposte or chamber for a short period of time. It got removed all together and exchanged for trading on ripostes, while chambering was left without anything and is a normal attack now. So chambering can basically not be used in teamfights or 1vX anymore, since you're not able to deal with many attacks at once using a chamber.

Mercenary 45 83
  • 8 May
 daWASTI

dont forget that matchmaking will be a thing ... good players will probably mostly stay among themselves in matchmaking, where with enough playerbase hopefully everyone will be able to find matches on their level of skill and have fun there

Mercenary 45 83
 daWASTI

With the removal of active parry, chambering has become quite useless in teamplay and especially 1vX. It leaves you very open to other incoming attacks and is not applicable in most scenarios. I personally don’t mind the new riposte trades, but with active parrying on chambering a lot of options for more skilled mix-ups of defence and offence in teamplay got removed.
So, with this I am aiming for exactly these options that should take a lot of practice and make the game more interesting later on after many hundred hours, while not taking away from the fun for casual players.

A few patches ago I had an idea that could be transformed into something that brings back chambering in team fights and can give the game back a lot of depth that people have been missing in this update (at least from what I heard).

What’s the idea?

The idea that came to my mind, when chamber-feinting started to cost stamina, was a defensive chamber-feint(DCF). I understood that chamber-feints need to cost stamina just like normal feints, however I was missing the defensive use of it … a chamber-feint so quick that pretty much nobody was panicking to it, but it acted as a stamina-free parry for me and I always considered that a good aspect of how the mechanic Chambering plays out in duels as well as in certain teamplay situations(more passively staying back and parrying a few hits without stamina).

How would that be implemented?

The main thing in the implementation of this would be, to make sure that the animation is not aggressive looking and can not be abused to actively make someone panic (some people can be scared passively just by blocking, but I can’t help with that). This could be achieved through a time window in the attack … not as a feint window after the chamber connects. This way you directly put a cap on how far the tracer can go before that move, meaning that your window for doing the DCF also depends on how well you chambered. If you input your attack very early and just at the last bit of the chamber window get in your chamber, then your DCF window might be very short or you might not be able to DCF at all and you will have to either chamber-feint aggressively using stamina or just chamber normally. You could say “late-chambering” affects your possibilities of saving stamina and using it as a more skilled parry option.

How will that affect Chambering in teamplay?

If it is made sure that the DCF doesn’t make people panic, then you could reduce the recovery for it drastically, because you don’t have to give time for foot working a punish as you would on a normal feint. That can of course be “abused” to get a quick attack in especially in duel situations, similar to a riposte without the extra cost of stamina (but I think that is an acceptable reward for doing a chamber instead of a parry, and also you would have gotten a faster attack through not doing DCF, but just chamber, since you still have a small recovery on it and your follow up has no speed-up as chambers do … depends on how the timings are realized in detail later then, but I’m pretty confident that can be addressed). EDIT: actually this could play out as a "chamber-ripost" ... a fast follow up to your DCF without stamina cost for the "parry", with the difference of more dragability since it isn't a chamber atack. This would give even more options to chose from in offence ... benefit from the stamina advantage, while not being bound to the angle + maybe a morph on chambers. Eventually some stamina cost can be added there that is less than the ripost cost to fully integrate this into the existing system of mechanics.

What is the reduction of feint recovery on DCF even needed for?

It is needed for making “chain-chambering” in team fights and 1vX a thing. It will reward a player that is able to read all or at least many of the incoming attacks perfectly in type and timing with no stamina cost at all and a fast follow up attack on the last one attack the player decides/is able to do DCF on. Of course the reward of 0 stamina then would have to be taken away from “easy parries”, which I think are not the best solution to address defensive playstyles.

An idea by @Comeandsee could very well be added into this: he proposed small and in time limited movement buffs on chambering to enhance their usability in teamfights.

Combined with DCF, so you get small speedups and less strict turncaps for a very short time if you do a successful DCF, this would help doing chain-chambering and move the barrier in performing that more towards the actual reading skill of the player rather than restrictions in movement and turncap, so that he can really do that on nearly every attack he read accordingly well. You could keep these movement-buffs out of duels through giving them only after the second DCF in a certain short period of time.

Other ideas on Chambering in teamfights

Now the idea that I presented so far takes quite a lot of reading skill and therefor practice and frustration tolerance. To revive chambering in teamfights in a bit lower version I propose bringing back the active parry on them, but in a different version similar to what I have in mind with the chain-chambering.

The active parry on chambering could be done as a chain-parry after the initial chamber. Meaning for every incoming attack during the chamber the player has to press RMB within a certain quite short time window to perform an active parry. If he doesn’t then active parry will be gone for the rest of the attack and it ends up as normal chamber.
Such an active-chain-parry should cost some stamina on every parried attack (maybe 2, to still give an advantage over normal chain parrying, if “0 stamina on easy parries” gets removed), since you have to draw a line between the chain-chambering with DCF and active-parry.
There is still the issue of active parry looking a bit janky … eventually a deflection animation (idea by BoB) can be implemented there and who knows … maybe even physics on the deflection so that the own sword gets pushed to the side a bit aswell during an active parry, but that’s really not of high priority at all and would take some time to develop I guess.

My approach is to leave the game for casuals nearly as it is now and make the game as easy to pick up as possible, while having lots of room for more skilled playstyles, that shouldn’t affect the fun for newcomers much. Afterall a chain-chamber or active-chain-parry after a chamber would probably be a quite rare thing to see and then an obvious act of skill that the outplayed ones can hopefully appreciate as well.

In duels DCF would define a clearer line to determine the more skilled player in defence as you get a stamina advantage through being able to chamber more, while leaving more offensive options than now as you could use the stamina advantage of chambering, but still don’t necessarily have to execute it fully and can follow up with anything else you want.

I hope I brought my ideas across understandably. Let me know if it makes sense for you, what you think of it and if you have any additional ideas that could fit into that concept. For a short answer you can also take part in these polls:

If anything is not explained well enough, feel free to ask questions before you take your vote

Should defensive chamber feinting(DCF) be implemented?
Should active-chain-parry be implemented?

PS: I will probably be editing this post for a while, as there are new ideas of others that can be added and a few things are maybe unclear in explanation

Mercenary 45 83
  • 6
  • 30 Apr
 daWASTI

@Jax said:
Without the current benefits of riposte trading, riposte feints would be fine imo
Currently I think that since ripostes are scarier in general now, having feints on them would be a little too powerful.

are they fine then in your opinion or not?? pls what is this forum

riposts are as "scary" as before and force you on the def equally, with AP or with RT, but surely ... they become much scarier once you removed hit-parry on them aswell. gg

@Jax said:

@daWASTI said:
alcohol test on the forum login when

i would have like 3 posts if that was the case

Mercenary 45 83
  • 3
  • 30 Apr
 daWASTI

Exactly @Lionheart Chevalier, thats why we should start thinking about the concepts of combat first and do a layout for that before the mechanics are implemented. Because not only were the animations of RF a bit shitty, but it of course also was very easy to use it to take out better players.

So instead of just talking about anims/timings or removing them all together as it is now ... we should think about what they were for in the game and what skill level they need to be shifted to.

The main purpose of RF is to balance out chambering as it is a good way for newcomers to get into feinting and becoming more or less immune to that with a good learning curve. So basically you could say: Chambering is the thing that balances feinting from being the equalizer that it was in Chivalry and that now was RF.

So how do we shift RF to the skill level where it needs to be?

It needs to be harder to use, while the usage of ripost needs to stay the same, as it is a fundamental part of the game and should stay there.(i talked about the subsystems of the combat before, ripost is something "casuals" should be able to use aswell ofc)

How do we make RF harder to use? Let's collect ideas for that. My first idea was to have a difficulty in the timing for pressing Q:

For a normal feint, you can press Q throughout the entire windup ... meaning you have to learn one timing and thats it.
If you made RF so that you can not press it throughout the entire ripost windup, but only after a certain time -> until the end of the windup, then the player has to have two timings in mind.

You could increase difficulty through making the time window in which Q can be pressed pretty small (100-150ms, being smaller than chamber window, but you control yourself when its going to be so you should be able to estimate that). You could even add a punishment to missing that window, by losing extra stamina or something, increasing the risk of using RF in a heated situation.

I am strongly for leaving this unbearable crying and discrediting behind @yourcrippledson. We should rather collect some creative ideas on how to really make things better.

Mercenary 45 83
  • 2
  • 29 Apr
 daWASTI

Man i know, having pointless discussions about your own "toolset of skills" and the skill tree doesn't pay very well ... do you plan a career as a sit-down comedian?

Why are you leading the thread nowhere and everytime I've seen you discuss something? Is meaning-free accumulations of smart sounding words and "git gud" the only level someone can argue about this game with you on?

I've said everything about my opinion to this update and will therefore leave you in peace now, have fun.

Mercenary 45 83
  • 2
  • 29 Apr
 daWASTI

I really enjoy how you like to diagnose the skill of people that you never played against in a discussion where skill does not even matter at all and attempt to discredit them with these assumptions, while all you do is discredit yourself with every thoughtless comment more that you post on this or any other thread. You won't get shamed eternally for something so little, but you're constantly begging to be called out for the stuff that you let us read here.

But go on please, it's quite funny in a way.

Btw i love how you keep editing your posts back and forth :D

Mercenary 45 83
  • 4
  • 29 Apr
 daWASTI

@yourcrippledson said:

@DarkTiti said:
I'm still not quite convinced but hey, good arguments there.
Maybe I'll kill my spirit some day when I have time haha

I can chamber with 70% to 90% success rate. Vs opponents similar in skill. This doesn't mean i chamber 70 to 90% of their swings though lol I have to be extremely mindful of which attacks are likely chamberable. If my opponent is good and mindful of his attacks he might not present an opportunity to chamber safely. This is where baiting comes in, where you might feint, so they chamber it, but you chamber their chamber attempt and it surprises them.

Basically they are a hugely vital asset to my toolset. You can get off one chamber and it can win you the duel, or you can get off 7 and loose the duel, that isn't really the point. CHAMBER OF DOOM is a piece of the puzzle that is MORDHAU and you are going to need it in the end.

I am still learning though so when i do more chambers like chambering everything and try specifically to focus on them to learn, i will fail most of them and go -20 in a duel server.

Just pull your mouse in the direction they are swinging from and attack right before there strike hits. From there you just have to learn to recognise which strikes are worth doing this against and what they look like and how they may be manipulated. It is quite complicated which is why i facepalm when people say the game is too "easy and simple" now.

@yourcrippledson said:
I was actually wasted last night and posted that in the wrong thread, so i wasn't responding to either of you heh sorry.

But active parry was broken in many ways. We are trying something different now and i think it is better.

Apologies for the confusion and wasting your time responding to something pointless. Bad forum etiquette on my part..

I acknowledged that you see trading just as a test, what else of substance did i miss to reply on? RT does not accomplish the same as AP and is not a simplified form of it by any means. Completely different thing.

I'm not talking about anyones skill, the whole time I have been talking about problems in the mechanics by structure, not about how they are implemented. It does not matter what the chamber window is, if they are just completely free of purpose in teamfights. It's not about what you or anyone can do right now. It is about what is possible to be done.

Wheras for you it seems to be a lot about discrediting others:

@yourcrippledson said:

@thecrc-cristian said:
This patch has turned Mordhau into a casual game. Why would you remove feint riposte? It is needed to kill noobs fast

If you need RF to kill nubs fast... you are a noobcasual.

heresy.png

Is it toxicity to take apart what you say? I'm sincerely sorry if it hurt you that I told you to think about what you write a bit more.

EDIT: damn i could stretch this comment forever with how you try to balance the game around yourself

@yourcrippledson said:

@Jax said:
what we've seen needs to be changed, plus rough outlines of how we are fixing these issues.

Overheads seem harder to use around team mates in this than in chiv. I find myself using stabs exclusively... Maybe that's okay?
Is it possible to make it so only the last 15% of your swing won't damage team mates?

Mercenary 45 83
  • 29 Apr
 daWASTI

@yourcrippledson said:
"NOT ENJOYABLE FOR ANYONE" You are remind me of the guy wearing a sandwich board, screaming doomsday prophesies on the street corner. The irony being, we are truly fucked if we listen to them...

The problem is simple:

You have a server of casuals, people that have just installed the game.
And then you get a guy trading his way through 1v2s. Might be fine for everyone the first hour.
But you need to give people something to progress in ... if they notice that after 20h they still don't have the right tools to deal with an agressive ripost monster and not get killed, then it will annoy them most likely.

Making 1vX easier, yes sure, give rewarding experiences to everyone to enjoy the game. But a 1v2 against players on the same skill level should still be a quite rare act of a really good play and not something that happens by standard.

As I said in the post I wrote in the mean time ... I don't mind testing out things, but why not communicate what is a complete bullcrap test and what is seriously meant to lead somewhere. Then feedback can be given differently.

I might have come off as a prophet, I'm clearly not, but all I read so far from you is trying to balance the game around what you personally can or can't do, which is completely irrelevant to anything. I'm not good at kicking for example ... you won't hear me talk about kick balance since i actually just haven't tried it out enough.