Mordhau
 yourcrippledson
Baron
  • Likes received 2087
  • Date joined 1 May '17
  • Last seen 27 Mar '19

This user is suspended.

Private Message

Baron 1551 2087
  • 15 Jun '18
 yourcrippledson

@SK.Edam said:
why remove it when you can make it an option? chiv had it no one seemed to care?

@yourcrippledson said:
well this is kina gey

Maybe read the thread

Baron 1551 2087
  • 9 Jun '18
 yourcrippledson

@EruTheTeapot said:

@Pred said:

  • Eveningstar close grip

Fuck me, right ?
I'm not even sure troll or serious tbh

They do need to fix it so it isn't going through my hand very blatantly on some of the mace heads.

Baron 1551 2087
  • 8 Jun '18
 yourcrippledson

@EruTheTeapot said:
Alpha population has extreme low numbers in 3rd use I think ?

I switch to it situationally. AKA I exploit it when I can.

Baron 1551 2087
  • 2 Jun '18
 yourcrippledson

add this tho

Baron 1551 2087

@Lincs said:

@das said:
Mirage Arcane Warfare magically glowing blade during riposte-parry, like AP with on ripostes with MAGIC!

Or Active Clash so we can have Slasher Clasher Racer again.

I was thinking audio cues, too. A big whoosh, or a clang sound. Good sound design is essential to competitive games anyway, and I think adding good audio cues for obscure mechanics like AP ripostes is a step in the right direction. Maybe some kind of lens flare around the character as well?

Have our characters yell what they are doing in an anime voice. "AHAA I AM UNFLINCHABRU!"

Baron 1551 2087
  • 1
  • 25 May '18
 yourcrippledson

@Mittsies said:

@yourcrippledson said:
Why not just tell us?

Doing so would probably be misleading and pointless. As tim explained, "range" is not simply a number, it's a combination of factors.

Seems like they should be able to tell us what attacks have more reach, and exactly how much more, when comparing things like LS, Estoc, Greatsword, Zwei, etc... If not, that is kind of broken isn't it?

Baron 1551 2087
  • 23 May '18
 yourcrippledson

@Tim_Fragmagnet said:
In short, knowing the statistical length of the weapon is irrelevant, and is only good for comparing between weapons that use the same animations.

So they should take this knowledge and give us something that at least gives us an idea of relative weapon length between weapons of different animations, and weapons with the same animations can be compared directly.

Nobody seems to know how long the Estoc actually is. Some seem to think it is the same as Longsword, some think it is closer to the Greatsword, I think it is somewhere in-between.

Why not just tell us?

Baron 1551 2087
  • 22 May '18
 yourcrippledson

@Jax said:
Bows aren't just point and click. As crush said, us not having flinch on projectiles lets bows do more damage while retaining balance, and in addition to that there's a good possibility of a perk that helps archers kill other archers. Running that perk and shooting melee players won't make you any more effective, but if your goal is to counter-arch and you're running said perk+shortbow you might have a lot of success on other archers, at the cost of effectiveness on melee players (recurve is kinda bad for killing full plate, as it should be).

like a perk that lets me flinch an enemy archer or something?

Baron 1551 2087
  • 1
  • 22 May '18
 yourcrippledson

@Elder said:
This forum is a cesspool of ignorance. Have some faith in huggles and crush. They have thousands of hours in slasher games and can tell you from experience that projectiles are nothing but fun at the expense of others.

Was this supposed to answer my question?

This is literally the first time I have disagreed with Huggles on anything and of course I hear "how dare you disagree with Huggles he has so many hours, nub."

You have no clue how many hours I have, making your comment even more pointless than if you were right and I was a nub.

My last comment was asking about Archer V Archer gameplay, and how no-flinch ranged combat would work. Do you have any insight into this? I am assuming not since it is apparent you are a try-hard-melee-only-rage-boy

Baron 1551 2087
  • 22 May '18
 yourcrippledson

@crushed said:
Removal of range flinch is a matter of fun and balance for all parties involved, with range flinching you cannot have high/decent damage on them which makes them feel weak. I agree there's a certain gameplay aspect of flinching enemies from afar to help out teammates, but the vast majority of the time you want to deal damage and have decent killing power. Having both in a melee focused game is absurd.

Right now the melee guys can have their fights without having to worry to get flinched outside of melee things, which also improves the melee combat since the flinch can be stronger. You can still deal decent damage, on someone who is busy fighting someone else, while being at a safe distance yourself. Want to flinch him? go melee, it's as simple as that.

Next patch the projectile arc nerf is being reverted to how it was before, which will make them stronger and more fun to throw again, and we're adding a cosmetic weaker flinch animation to make the no flinch look better.

K

But how are you dealing with the way this affects archer V archer gameplay?

Using a Shortbow in chivalry, I was at the disadvantage of Range and Damage, and could be one shot from beyond my weapons effective range.
The way I took out enemy archers was by getting in closer and relying on my superior mobility and FLINCH to prevent them getting a shot off. If they get 1 shot off I am dead even after I had hit them 3 or 4 times with my bodkin arrows.

Without flinch I am just going to shoot at heavy bowmen as they laugh, stare me down, and kill me.

Baron 1551 2087
  • 21 May '18
 yourcrippledson

@Huggles said:

@yourcrippledson said:

@Huggles said:
Why do you draw this arbitrary realism line at headshots for projectiles? Should plate make projectiles do 0 damage and not flinch then? Because that would be much more realistic. Should blade instantly kill when entering the gaps on armor? Say, the face part on all medium helmets? Should hands be chopped off if you aren't wearing gauntlets?

I don't understand what makes lack of projectile flinch any more unrealistic than half of the fucking game.

Internal consistency. If I slash your plated boots and you flinch, but I put that same blade through your skull and no flinch, that is an example of internal inconsistency. The game doesn't even follow its own rules. Arbitrary rules are bad game design. set up your games logic, and stick to it. Or it isn't a world of its own to be lost in, it is just a broken game.

This game is becoming riddled with arbitrary rules creating more and more internal inconsistencies. It becomes a game where you have to learn how every single interaction works, it isn't fun to learn. As opposed to a game with 1 simple set of rules, which the gameplay naturally flows from, and where learning can be 100% intuitive, rather than strictly experimental.

It's not anymore arbitrary than blunt weapons having hit stop. It's simply a characteristic of the weapon category. Projectiles don't flinch just like large weapons can't combo and blunt weapons stop on hits.

No cause when you slash someone with a blade you'd do a draw cut to slice across them, and a blunt weapon you try to impact them hard so you don't draw it across them the same way. These things make sense in reality and set up the rules of the gameworld.

Besides that isn't an example of internal inconsistency at all. They have set up the rules: Blunt hitstop, blade combo.
If there was a random blunt weapon that was arbitrarily given combos cause of balance, or if they made maul not be able to flinch because of balance, that would be arbitrary exceptions to the game's logic.

The problem I have with your example of projectiles having specific rules of their own is that these proposed rules fly in the face of what has already been established as far as what affects a human and how in this world of MORDHAU.

You have to at least concede that it looks dumb as fuck and makes no sense, within the games own logic or IRL logic.

Baron 1551 2087
  • 4
  • 21 May '18
 yourcrippledson

@Huggles said:
Why do you draw this arbitrary realism line at headshots for projectiles? Should plate make projectiles do 0 damage and not flinch then? Because that would be much more realistic. Should blade instantly kill when entering the gaps on armor? Say, the face part on all medium helmets? Should hands be chopped off if you aren't wearing gauntlets?

I don't understand what makes lack of projectile flinch any more unrealistic than half of the fucking game.

Internal consistency. If I slash your plated boots and you flinch, but I put that same blade through your skull and no flinch, that is an example of internal inconsistency. The game doesn't even follow its own rules. Arbitrary rules are bad game design. set up your games logic, and stick to it. Or it isn't a world of its own to be lost in, it is just a broken game.

This game is becoming riddled with arbitrary rules creating more and more internal inconsistencies. It becomes a game where you have to learn how every single interaction works, it isn't fun to learn. As opposed to a game with 1 simple set of rules, which the gameplay naturally flows from, and where learning can be 100% intuitive, rather than strictly experimental.

Baron 1551 2087
  • 3
  • 21 May '18
 yourcrippledson

I am looking for a game that puts me in the shoes of a medieval knight, archer, peasant, whatever. IDC if archer can shoot my feet under my shield. That is when I duck. I even liked dueling archers 1v1 in Chiv. Both as one and against.

The closer the game is to IRL Logic, the better it is, the more interesting it is, the more emergent gameplay can stem from it. This game feels artificial. Every interaction is strictly planned out to be how the devs want it to be, not how logic would have dictated it to be in the 1300's. And I am 99% against this philosophy. Except when absolutely necessary.

say hello to arbitrary rule # 732, you can't do derpadidoo when holding a flibadidi because BALANCE. Logic is important to a cohesive and immersive gameworld.

Baron 1551 2087
  • 21 May '18
 yourcrippledson

@Huggles said:
It is just plain silly for archers to be incredibly strong in a melee focused game. They should have a role and operating outside of that role should have serious drawbacks. Projectiles should be a long ranged damage dealer. Period.

Nobody here is arguing for them to be INCREDIBLY STRONG.

I just want mechanics to make sense. not be arbitrary.

I want it to not look retarded when headshots don't flinch.

I want archers to be a semi-competent, flexible and fun thing to play as, with more meaningful interaction than just shooting into the crowed without any strategy or purpose beyond "we are forced to include them because it is a medieval game and people expect it"

They have just been thrown in cause. If this is the case, the game would be better without them.

Baron 1551 2087
  • 9
  • 21 May '18
 yourcrippledson

They have removed any possibility for any interesting interaction between projectiles and melee. Projectiles are now just encouraged to be cancer, something to throw at the enemies backs. Not actually something to be combative with.

Contrast this to Chivalry, where you had to dodge and shit with footwork, be smart with positioning, utilise cover, and it was fun for the archer, and it made classes have different interactions which were all fun and balanced. Vanguard is weak against projectiles, but he is fast enough to dodge, he can hide in his smoke, he can throw axes at them so they have to move, preventing them from lining up a shot, but he can 1 shot archers. The knight and maa got a shield. Knight is easy to hit but takes more hits, gets biggest shields, maa has dodge, which was fun to use against archers, and it was fun predicting a dodge to line up a headshot.

All of these dynamic combat interactions are gone. Now you are encouraged to play the most cancerous way possible, just shoot at guys who aren't looking at you, who don't know you're there, then run away. This is not as fun for EITHER SIDE.

I see why they want it the way they are making it, for the purely competitive player who rages when they are flinched when fighting another competitive player. And to prevent the end game chiv had when archers became super annoying as they mastered it. BUT they are WAY OVER DOING IT.
For the low-level and casual play, this is an objectively bad decision. Aesthetically it looks terrible. Realism suffers. consistency suffers. In-game-logic suffers.

In Chiv I enjoyed tricking archers and the like with footwork. I enjoyed waiting out my enemy and getting that throwing axe hit when they are dodging all over the place. I like having to carry a shield and it having a really solid purpose and role.

All of this is lost, and I don't see it being worth it, not even close.

Baron 1551 2087
  • 21 May '18
 yourcrippledson

This literally makes projectiles not only useless, but actually closer to a detriment, when the enemy you throw them at not only has 0 chance of being flinched, but if they block it, they can get an inflinchable riposte out of it.

Baron 1551 2087
  • 21 May '18
 yourcrippledson

It's bullshit that I put a sword through your skull and you just stared me down.. It looks extremely stupid. Why do they even make a sound? it makes it look even more stupid than if they didn't react at all.

Baron 1551 2087
  • 1
  • 21 May '18
 yourcrippledson

Stand in front of a full body mirror for me huggles. Now let me know if your head is a smaller target than the rest of your body. Do you think that would significantly reduce the number of times you are flinched by projectiles? While maintaining some sense of realism and satisfaction for anyone witnessing a deadly projectile piercing you head.

Baron 1551 2087
  • 21 May '18
 yourcrippledson

@Void said:
Crippledson is this the real you, or are you memeing like in the "delete maul" thread?

Dank, they don't have to test every possible idea. Sometimes you know beforehand that something will have a bad impact. It's not that they have all the time at their disposal.

Then why did they include FULL flinch on everything when they added projectiles? It seems to me if they are so adept at knowing what will work and what won't, they would have been smart enough to try Headshot-flinch only from the beginning, closer to something that would be acceptable. Instead it was full flinch and broken to the point where you could stun lock people with any throwable with ease...

Baron 1551 2087
  • 21 May '18
 yourcrippledson

Nobody owes me shit. I am not delusional.

If I cared about how people perceived me, I would have a real flicking life.

This is my big stink about something that seems fairly obvious to me. It should just follow logic. Over half of the voters voted for a flinch of some kind, so testing it on at least some projectile headshots would be smart. Seeing as how we went from amazing projectile arks with full flinch on everything, to no flinch on any projectile ever, it almost seems like they made them as OP and annoying as possible to begin with so players would be more accepting when they turn everything into A NERF.

Take it or leave it. But that's my opinion, and I am an asshole.