Mordhau
 BlueTeamLivesMatter
  • Likes received 31
  • Date joined 25 Jun
  • Last seen 30 Aug

Private Message

41 31

Ranked of a size larger than 3v3 might also be nice. Yes it might rarely have an actual matchmaking population larger than 12, but you get more build variety in larger groups.

41 31

Kotaku article incoming. "Donald Trump yells racial epithets in right wing combat sim. Naked young musicians abound."

41 31

@smug said:
That’s because the game isnt designed for 48+ man servers. If you play 24 man frontline or TO this wouldnt be a big deal. Quite frankly the way its designed currently is smart and crucial to game balance.

I would like to live in a reality in which this game is designed for 64 man servers, unless you want to toggle it the other way of course.

Please do not ruin my delusion.

41 31

Calm down. People sitting in front of the spawn camera are really easy longbow headshots. Dont deprive me of my free kills.

41 31

This is a mechanic I dont know enough about. I havent seen it well documented anywhere. Care to enlighten me?

41 31

@Pandamansleep said:
But doesn't the perk say it also affects throwables?

Throwables, when thrown by a Huntsman, do extra damage to mercs with a Quiver. Under no circumstances to Throwables themselves cause you to take extra damage.

Giving vs Receiving.

41 31

@esturias said:

@ZugZugNeverEnds said:
throwing weapons don't have a quiver, so no, huntsman has no effect

Woud have been my guess, too, as the quiver is directly mentioned in the perk's description.

Which also applies, as seriousmike says, to bow you randomly pick up off the ground.

They only have 3 shots because they have no quiver, they have no quiver so you dont get huntsmaned. All the logic pans out.

41 31

Unpopular opinion, but I'm actually fine with Red vs. Blue.

As you can probably tell, I play pretty much exclusively on Blue team, and while all the Blue TK was pretty funny in like the first week of play, I really never see it anymore.

41 31

@SWSeriousMike said:
I had the impression that you wanted to discuss your suggestion. I can see now that I was mistaken.
Go on then. Promote it without accepting feedback.

Lol, it might not even be a good suggestion, hard to know without trying it. Your "feedback" though is illogical.

I dont really want to discuss my suggestion though no, not past the point of making a good enough case for it that the Devs will consider it and maybe test it. I cant conclusively prove that its a good idea, and I dont honestly care to convince people like yourself who are apparently pretty partisan. You already said you believe there is no solution, I'm not foolish enough to believe that you actually want to discuss a solution either.

41 31

@SWSeriousMike said:

  1. During parries a turn cap is more important than ever. Otherwise you could just turn like a maniac and parry in a cylinder around you. Parry already is very forgiving. That would be a step in the wrong direction.

Lol, but we can already parry in a cylinder.

And I don't think the turn cap would even address the problem you are complaining about. It's still fast enough to look weird.

Then I can see why you're of the opinion that there literally is no solution, in which case, you really have very little to contribute.

  1. We don't need bigger parry bubbles, but we need awareness. Your turn cap would add 250ms to the reaction time when you know someone is behind you. I don't think that's desirable.

Lol, a turncap is either too fast or it isnt. Also, since the human body can already reach 2 revolutions per second, it cant look that weird. 720/sec was just an example anyway Goldilocks

And, in that example, 250ms would only be added to your 180 turn if you assume that the player originally had infinite DPI and sensitivity, thats just math. Realistically I doubt most non-ballerinas would even notice such a turn cap, otherwise they wouldnt be non-ballerinas. You logically cant have it both ways. Whatever speed someone might pick for a turn cap cant be both so fast that it doesnt solve the problem and so slow that it burdens people that werent part of the problem, simply by the definitions of the terms involved.

The only way your argument makes sense is if you believe that there is some massive grey area where tons of people have 10,000 dpi and rely on it for basic gameplay, but somehow arent ballerinas and only use that DPI to turn around in emergencies. It would be dishonest of me to ignore the fact that realistically, there probably is some small grey area, but thats why you test mechanics to optimize their cost/benefit, and then still at least everyone would be playing by the same rules, and rules are what make a game.

41 31

@SWSeriousMike said:

The wide FOV means you dont actually have to compensate for eye movement

On that we disagree. Especially because the FOV is tied to the aspect ratio of the display.

Also you are controlling two hands with one mouse. And your hips. And the eyes. And in real life you can attack people behind you. Taking 250 ms just to turn around and then you still need to parry when someone strikes your back would make frontline even more annoying.

Your proposal just isn't good IMHO.

I think you are relying on 1 mechanic to do too much.

Also, I anticipated the argument that a movement turncap could be problematic for parrying.

  1. Parrying is a window, it has a duration. The turncap could be removed or reduced for that duration if it actually turned out to be problematic, which I sort of doubt.

  2. Its actually questionable whether you should be able to 180 parry. We've all seen the auto-block cheat videos, it looks retarded, it is retarded. If someone attacks you from behind in frontline, 90% of the time you die anyway as things currently stand, unless you're cheating ofc. Dont let people get behind you. Positioning is itself a skill.

41 31

@Deadmode said:
I did make a post before about reducing the deflection ratio to mouse input of the torso so that the same moves can be performed mechanically, but with less of a bendy-human look.

That is a excellent suggestion. Even if other attempts were made to address ballerina shit, if well implemented your suggestion could improve how all styles of play look.

I do question how it would affect readability of certain moves, but if you've made a whole thread on it I doubt I'm the first one to do so.

41 31

@SWSeriousMike said:

@BlueTeamLivesMatter said:
Specific to the offensive option of Ballerina shit. I've seen it suggested that all movement be given a turncap. This doesnt seem unreasonable to me, as long as the turn cap were at least a good 2-3x the turncap of either the median weapon or the held weapon. New players, or people who like some degree of immersion, really only complain about the extreme examples of Ballerina. I'm pretty sure there's a reasonable middle ground.

But it is unreasonable to almost everyone else. The mouse movement also represents eye movement. There is no significant turn cap to that in real life. This game isn't about realism, I know that. But when people get headaches because of weird limitations, you are probably going a bit too far. Also I don't want to take 3 seconds just to look if my team mates are still there.

https://bmcmusculoskeletdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2474-11-222
440 degrees/sec for peak reasonable head movement.

The wide FOV means you dont actually have to compensate for eye movement, though if you wanted to be really nitpicky you could artificially induce a special motion blur to simulate vestibulo-ocular reflex. A joking ridiculous example

Idk of any actual studies on human body turn speed, realistically you'd have to correlate it to speed and momentum, which would be overly complicated for a video game.

Round up to anywhere to like 720 degrees/sec and you have a realistically based, and fairly generous turn cap for normal movement, that would still exclude a good deal of the Ballerina crap. Conveniently, two full rotations per second is about how fast an actual ballerina pirouettes.

I'd take a look at whiplash studies for a reasonable turncap on the Y-axis. Afaik people report symptoms as low as 300 degrees/sec

Anyway, its perfectly possible to look at real life metrics, estimate how to approximate them appropriately in a game, add a bit just in case, and arrive at perfectly acceptable turn caps for movement that still manage to fix most actual Ballerina crêpe.

Personally, the more an opponent tries to "abuse" their dpi the easier they actually are to read, so my own personal play is not affected either way. However, every single new player I've spoken to about it has thought it was a problem, and a new thread about it being a problem pops up every day here or on reddit, besides the fact that one of the key selling points of the game was supposed to be a departure from the spasticity of Chiv. Based on that alone I think it would be obstinate for the developers not to treat it like a problem, let alone any other logical argument I could bring.

41 31

@LumpyCustard said:

@BlueTeamLivesMatter said:
I just cant help but feel that if parrying werent so ridiculously lenient then we wouldnt need our offensive options to be quite so... recklessly designed.

In early design videos (on kickstarter) the devs showcased how parrying worked, and back in 2016 or 2017 they mention specifically in the video that you need to look toward your enemies attack to parry it, rather than just having a parry "window" in front of you.

Was this removed or were the devs just being very loose with their wording in the video?

Idk, I've seen it specifically stated in many guides that you have to look at the tip of the weapon to block it, I think its even in the tutorial, cant check right now.

For whatever reason though, its just quite lenient.

41 31

I honestly think part of the problem is how huge the parry area is, its so huge you can parry most things with your eyes closed. Listen for footsteps so you're facing the enemy, listen for grunt, boom you can play the game blindfolded. It works surprisingly well even against mid-level duelists.

I just cant help but feel that if parrying werent so ridiculously lenient then we wouldnt need our offensive options to be quite so... recklessly designed.

Specific to the offensive option of Ballerina shit. I've seen it suggested that all movement be given a turncap. This doesnt seem unreasonable to me, as long as the turn cap were at least a good 2-3x the turncap of either the median weapon or the held weapon. New players, or people who like some degree of immersion, really only complain about the extreme examples of Ballerina. I'm pretty sure there's a reasonable middle ground.

41 31

Enemies are only free to gang-kick you if you're trying to 1vX. If your team is there then they leave themselves extremely open.

In an XvX, you either control enemy swings in an area around you with that shield, or you bait them into opening themselves via that kick. Backpedal the kicks in XvX, dont try to chamber them thats dumb.

Just accept that Shields finally sorta work again in 1v1, and have definite utility in XvX, and that they're nothing special for 1vX.

41 31

@smellycathawk

Do you have something you actually want to say?

At this point if you object to an argument of mine in any specific I invite you to elaborate. Otherwise, its probably best to cease trying to exacerbate a mild disagreement between two individuals who are not you.

41 31

@ToLazy4Name said:
what autism afflicts you that someone gives you a well-reasoned post and you respond by calling them a troll lmao

There's actually very little reasoning present in their post. As they describe it, stamina may as well not exist, and the "reasoning" is that if stamina existed it would be boring.

Duels between higher skill people do frequently come down to stamina, whether or not people are actually disarmed the resource management is still omnipresent. Either they dont know that, which I sort of doubt, or they were taking expeditious, hyperbolic brevity so far as to actually be wrong.

41 31

@ToLazy4Name said:
they're a fucking mod lmao very big forum troll indeed

I guessed that when I saw them threatening to ban someone.

Apparently some person called Botas is still here though so...?

Anyway, some of the worst trolls I've ever seen have been mods. Something about have ultimate power over a tiny, meaningless domain makes some people incredibly touchy and conceited. Not that I'm suggesting this about any particular individual here.

Idk why you all seem so interested though. What I specifically wanted to avoid was dissecting what I disagreed with in their statement, since its useless to effort-post if you're just going to be further patronized, yet I have the feeling that not so many people would have come out of the wood work to comment on that. Y'all need something better to do.

41 31

@smellycathawk said:

@BlueTeamLivesMatter said:
@LuxCandidus

To each his own, but your views as presented are narrow, subjective and patronizing.

if ya used completely random adjectives this comment wouldn't be any less pertinent.

To each her own, but your views as presented are chubby, effervescent and gluttonous.

Well thats also accurate, but I try not to demonize body weight.

Mainly though I just disagree with this individual, but am not 12, and see no future in dissecting their comment to be further patronized or w/e. I saw their massive comment count, so I checked their comment history. The type of forum troll revealed to me thusly isnt usually worth debating.