And another one:
This one is only 36 minutes, has minimal talking, no music, and includes game sound. This is probably the best of the 3 to watch so far.
Here's another one (I included sound and didn't have music this time around):
First 44 minutes are duels, afterwards it's 2v2s. There's a lot of complaining, so I'd recommend you mute the stream if you don't want to hear us (especially me) bitching about things. Some of it is legitimate whining, some of it not.
Here's some highlights:
Any time I'm not streaming -- so basically 99% of my Mordhau hours which is 1k rn.
normally I play without game sound.
Why u do this
normally I play without game sound.
normally I play without game sound.
Why u do this
Personal preference mostly. Playing with sound is certainly helpful in a teamfight sense (being able to gauge direction and measure distance off of sound), but not necessary. You can be just as aware and sensible about these things with a little more effort in the neural department. If sound is your personal preference, it's a bit unlucky because playing off of sound is always going to be at a disadvantage due to how the sound design works in this game (grunts don't give you reliable information).
Mainly it's that I've gotten used to playing without sounds in any game I play (exception being a game like CS where sound is 100% necessary) and I find that playing without sound increases my focus. While you could argue there are some helpful sound queues (footsteps), there's also a lot of sound that I find to be distracting and detrimental for myself.
All settings at minimum & .3 res scale.
Music is included because normally I play without game sound.
If you can tolerate the really low quality, there's about an hour of me dueling some decent players. I played really shit during the first round -- you can see when I'm doing the riposte footwork I'm parrying early. Otherwise pretty decent duels. I think I get farmed 3rd map a little bit because I switch it up a bit and try to run into weapons, but of course this doesn't work. Not even sure why I tried to do that.
Next time I'll try to stream a pug or something, maybe up the bitrate slightly if my internet can handle it. The problem is that my ping fluxes a lot when I stream which is also why I'm just eating a lot of hits for free. This along with my potato graphics is generally why I avoid streaming.
Manual & automatic are both used in high level play (manual more than automatic). They both have clear uses and instances in which they are respectively applicable.
Don't see how at top level play automatic reduces the skill ceiling, gonna have to elaborate for that one. Removing automatic is just gating players behind input latency whether ping related or hardware related. If anything, it'd lower the skill ceiling. Players have to make a choice between manual and automatic in situations that don't always present a clear choice for which is more useful.
Walking into swings doesn’t work; run away from it instead. Always run opposite to their swings.
1 . Feels clunky
2 . Destroys a lot of important elements in teamplay
3 . CF window is already small -- you're taking away the ability to micro feint or even do a moderate feint thus leaving the player with only deep combo feints which is just taking away options/depth from the player.
4 . Happy feet would become a dominant/oppressive strategy with a guaranteed damage window like the one proposed. (1vx also probably fucked as a result)
5 . The only positive implication that I could think of would be a more grounded/methodical look to combat. Basically, players would engage more carefully and range play would have more merit. However, this would probably slow down the game considerably and discourage aggressive plays.
6 . Guaranteed damage never feels good (insiders, kick stun, etc)
Sorry, how are the inbetween angles at all useful or relevant? It’s one big meme.
Great points. Newer players not knowing to sprint while attacking is by far the #1 thing they should know. If you're not sprinting when you attack, you're basically playing the game at 1/3 range.
The shield idea Hadeus is referring to encompasses a normal parry and a holdable block. The idea is that you give the shield two options. In this instance, parrying with a shield would be cheaper than holding, but holding would be a static value meaning that your value of stamina scales proportionally with the amount of players you're fighting. In English and using some math:
I won't get specific as there's no need. Let's say in a 1v1, if a LS is attacking a kite shield as fast as it can, it will last roughly 18 seconds before being disarmed. The idea is that shield has a parry function which just acts like a normal parry (drains stamina on each connected parry). The other function is the holdable block: the holdable block drains x stamina per y interval (i.e, 12 stamina per 1.5 seconds). This is what is meant by the static value -- 12 per 1.5 seconds is always the same but parrying varies with weapons. Using the holdable block with my version, the shield will only hold out for 12 seconds before being disarmed. At first glance this appears as a simple (and hefty) stamina nerf to shield going from 18 seconds to 12 seconds. However, the benefit comes in the form of 1vx. If you add another longsword to the equation using the former system, the shield suddenly only lasts roughly 9 seconds whereas with the static holdable block still lasts 12 seconds. Therefore, holdable block is very undesirable in a 1v1 scenario but very much beneficial in a 1vx/teamplay scenario.
On paper this is a really nice way to think about shield balance and this idea might seem good in itself, but the implementation for it would be problematic. Since the shield has both a parry function and block function, you can't have them as both RMB because there are some intricacies that become troublesome. For example, you could just hold block for 400ms or so and entirely skip recovery. The finer details of a solution like this are what make the idea troublesome. There would have to be different buttons, different values, different detection for what state you're in (parry vs. block), etc. While I appreciate that people like this idea, it's just not really feasible when you think about actually implementing it. With that being said, this, I think, is still a good framework to approaching shields. Holdable block is hard to balance, so you either remove holdable block or make holdable block undesirable in the situations where it is most problematic for gameplay (1v1s).
No one really uses shield and, from what I've played, they're back to being shit again on the current build in sharp contrast to how they were 1 or 2 builds ago.
i pledged $5 to the mcdonalds happy meal and after i take a shit on your cash register, you ban me ??
The problem with this thread and feint threads in the past is the over simplification and misrepresentation of the mechanic. Feints take skill to use. If you don't know what you're doing, you'll end up dying by trying to use them. The disparity between skill to perform and skill to defend certainly exists, I don't think anyone would deny that because it is inherent for feints and will always be as a result of how the mechanic works, but it's not as severe as people commonly make it out to be (like 0-100 or something). It seems I have to again suggest that the game is a multi-variable game, it's not a reaction time simulator. Feint reading doesn't always scale with hours put into the game or your reaction time. I used to tell noobs all the time that I have 300ms reaction time on humanbenchmark and I play on 60hz (now 144hz) to inspire them. The point being that feinting isn't so one dimensional as people make it out to be.
This thread focuses on the new player experience from what I've gathered. In that sense, (and knowing matchmaking will exist) why don't we focus on what noob vs noob fights will look like rather than some comp guy deleting some new player? In CS it certainly doesn't feel good when someone much better than you peeks a corner and insta one taps you. Noob vs noob situations look a lot different - usually both noobs spraying at each other and missing a significant amount of shots before one of them comes out on top. Sometimes they'll get a nice headshot or a perfect spray. I imagine a similar parallel in Mordhau.
Furthermore, if we're talking about the new player experience, why don't we ask some newer players how they feel? This thread consists of above average players speculating on what the new player might think about feints. Ask DasShuugs what he thinks about feints. 30 hours in chiv and hundreds in Mordhau (although he was able to read a lot at only the 100-200 hour mark). He is a prime example of what a new player might experience in the absence of matchmaking: having to fight chivalry veterans with thousands of hours and having no prior experience. Admittedly he had resources and help that other players didn't get, but I think that only emphasizes the need for an expansive tutorial and variety of resources to learn the game. You could argue that he is just an outlier, but we don't really have any kind of data to confidently conclude that. It's not just Shuugs either, there are other new players like Bob in EU.
All feints, with the exceptions of stabs, are readable. Highlighting the strength of stabs and thus the strength of feints via stabs is useless. Stabs are the issue (in that particular context), not the feints.
Arguing over whether or not a new player finds swing manipulation or feints more interesting is also useless. Unless a player has played the game, they probably have a limited sense of what is actually happening and therefore both feints and drags would appear just 'normal' to them. Extremes of feints (headbobbing) or swing manipulation (spinning or spazzing out) are both likely discouraging to new players. Feints objectively look cleaner because of the general lack of camera movement (yeah it exists Frise, but it's less extreme than chiv and at least in NA there's not many people doing it because it's not really effective in any capacity).
Longer release weapons also favor waterfalls or z-stabs, not just simple delay drags.
The chat log you included in your first post in this thread is taken out of context.
Or just press ctrl key and never have to worry about aiming your parry again. Just like in chiv.
That clip is a morph, not a feint. I don't blame you though, it visually looks like a feint.
You should test the effective range for yourself.
The option that the halberd has that doesn't really matter since for the vast majority of time you won't be utilizing that option. Its value is low in that sense. If you really want to stretch this whole strike thing, spear has 50ms faster strike, so how does the value on that stack up against halberd? It's all situational, but those few situations where you are utilizing strikes don't matter because the majority of value from your weapon is coming from what it is primarily doing which in this case is stabbing.
If we really want to stretch the argument more, I could say that spear is a lot harder to see than halberd. Similar to estoc almost - it's very thin and has a animation that poorly blends with running for some of the stabs.
The spear also has the fast mode, but, as you pointed out yourself, it's pointless to include that because you don't play spear to use alt mode spear since you would rather use short spear. This is completely fair. Likewise, if I wanted a weapon that has decent stabs and decent strikes, I would use zweihander.
Looking at flat ranges isn't very helpful when assessing the value of something like this. Effective range is the one that matters since the game isn't played standing still without movement.
In regards to the strike damage - if you're using alt mode halberd, you wouldn't want to be striking anyway. Likewise, if you're using spear, you also wouldn't want to be striking. It's not efficient to use that weapon if that's what you are primarily doing.
In any case, even if the range difference was as small as that, small differences like that are significant - especially when considering what kind of role you are playing as spear. Ideally as spear you're sitting back trying to weave in attacks by hiding your windup behind teammates and stabbing in close proximity to them. Small differences are noticeable & significant.
The spear is pretty much the strongest weapon in team play and comparing them isn't really fair because spear and halberd have different roles in terms of what they do in team compositions. The reach does matter, significantly. Spear out ranges halberd by a noticeable amount.
It's not so simple as you make it out to be. There could potentially be stamina changes and potentially new mechanics coming to the game...
Welcome the newest member of the community: BattlefieldRecapitator
18 users were active in the last 30 minutes:
λdambomb champton Vesanus Corsario renaissance Gluten ÐMontyleGueux Vaygr Huggles TheKingInTheNorth Lionheart Chevalier ohshitsorry blonde Bodkin saul_g00dman AngelEyes Tim_Fragmagnet Pred