Member
I kept seeing this argument pop up over and over as a defense to why it's OK that everyone sits back to wait for an opponent to make a mistake. So unlike with FH's broken combat system, I decided to be proactive and see if this was actually true:
"What we know now about sword fighting from the documented historical teachings and methods is that in earnest combat: You don't stand still. The sources specifically tell us to be in constant motion. You don't just dance around. The sources specifically tell us to cover and close in. You don't just parry and riposte. The sources specifically tell us not to try to block. You don't attempt to be passive or stay defensive. The sources tell us in particular to be aggressive, audacious, and take the initiative. You don't try to just win the range and timing by sneaking out blows and feints. You seek to displace the adversary's blows with counter-strikes timed in the middle of their action. You don't just hit out wildly or bash on their weapon. The sources tell us specifically to intercept and stifle their attacks by binding on their weapon and using body leverage. And you don't try to statically receive blows of their edge on your own edge, but set them aside with your flat, or better still, counter-hit them with your edge against their flat, even as edges themselves will readily clash in closing to bind. And lastly, both thrusting and cutting as well as grappling were always recognized as integral components for wielding all swords and weapons --armored or unarmored, on foot or horseback."
http://www.thearma.org/essays/Swordf...l#.WOOHDMspBnE
That's an article written by some one that specializes in medieval fighting not the more modern duel oriented formats we see today. So defense as we see it in FH is actually a bad idea realistically. Initiative is *very* important and we need more grappling not less.
Does this change anyone's opinion?
Junior Member
I am glad someone finally says this.
I myself practice historical fencing with the Longsword and pretty much the first thing that is being taught is "always attack first", because it is always easier and safer to take the initiative - the "vor" as it is called in the old german fencing manuscripts - than to be in the "nach" - to react to the attack of your enemy.
So really, the argument about "never attacking first because in real fights you just wait for your opponent do make a mistake" is completely implausible.
Senior Member
Senior Member
My idea was to give every player the lbs riposte - in an individual form.
The problem is, that punishing is needed in this game. The idea of punishment is deeply embedded in the system. If attacking is not strong enough to break the defense with brainwork, attacking needs mire tools yo bypass the defense. This needs to be doable but hard enough, to nit make defense pointless.
Perfect balance is needed - or a completely new system (especially, if we would start balancing around actual swordplay).
Member
Member
Good post man. You missed the "quote" though, so 9.5/10 only.=kweassa1917;12521890]The current meta of FH is a case where the first part of your comments which I've quoted above, are in direct contradiction with the second part of your comment.
Simply put, in the current meta, the "punishment outweighs the crime." The overall result of being parried is much too harsh and severe that it simply discourages any form of attack, really, and there are boatloads of circumstantial evidence to support this.
1. Changes in class evaluation
Before the official launch, before the current meta was set, classes with impressive offensive qualities were considered to be stronger, whereas those more (seemingly) inclined towards defense were considered lower in the tier. Then the realization came that it was both much easier and safer to stand on guard, parry incoming attacks to chain into a forced GB+heavy attack combo, and then the power balance was shifted. Shield-armed Warlords and Conquerors came on a sharp rise whereas the Orochi and Nobushi fell quickly.
2. Obsession to 'safe attacks'
Everybody is obsessed wit 'safe attacks' now, the skills that have reasonably good damage, and are at the same time among the fastest powers to activate so the chances of it being parried were low. Nowadays standard method of attacks consisted with light, heavy combos are usually considered near suicide.
3. Preference in item stats
The importance of stamina fell sharply, whereas defense, R-mode duration, and R-gain gained importance at a sharp rate. When gearing up high levels nobody considers stamina to be all that important now, because nobody uses consecutive attacks in the first place. You don't need stamina stats at all when all you do is basically turtle up for a parry.
4. Competitions and tournaments
Pretty much self-expalantory. The higher level you go, the more it is about the opponents doing nothing much but feint, feint, feint, feint, until one side successfully delivers a parry and thus, automatically lands a heavy attack. The person who does this 3~4 times first is the winner. That's what tourneys and matches have come to.
5. Shugoki suddenly becoming a thing
Due to the reality being as explained right above in 4, some people have now figured out a way to entirely bypass that turtle/parry/free heavy game by denying any kind of melee confrontation in the first place, and solely depending on unblockable/unparryable charge attacks that yield high damage. Whereas all other charge attacks are mostly knockdowns, the Shugoki's charge-grab actually deals high damage. So why play the turtle/parry/free-heavy game when you can just skip through all of that, sprint around in random directions at safe distances until your enemy comes close, and your superarmor+unblockable will guarantee a one-sided punishment?
Often, balance is simply right in front of your nose. People fail to realize it because they usually refuse to admit that balance may require their sacrifice in some parts.Perfect balance is needed - or a completely new system (especially, if we would start balancing around actual swordplay).
Unless people let go of the notion that they'll always be rewarded heftily when they successfully parry something, any talk about the problems of defensive meta is simply a fallacy -- it's just something they tell themselves to sleep easier at night,
It takes guts to admit oneself might be the part of the whole problem.
You think the eye can catch up to the hand with years of tranining? I want to believe that because i am a person that wants "balance" everywhere. However might not never work but i still think the eye can practice real hard and get really fast as well, but not as fast probably never idk.
I would like if parry didnt give any damage whatsoever and let the player defend against it. It would change the pace and initiate and also stop combos. Whereas block doesnt stop combos anymore.
Different balance for console and pc would be needed since console is 30fps and that can be huge according to those that play and show proof about it.
So parry can be different for several classes, one class can just simple get a faster heavy after a parry while one other class can get a faster light. Those are very simple, but it can go to be more extreme for other classes as well. Such as increasing the tempo for 3seconds after a parry for one, where as if the opponent do a parry within though 3seconds the tempo duration resets to 3seconds so the tempo is increased. Different playstytles.
Combos with more variation. Still everything defendable but more mix up makes you as the defender have to "worry" more about what will hit you and how it will hit you.
Combos can include range attacks and dash backwards to get range on your opponent, perhaps even have some gbs in there as well and more
Everything still defendable for sure but more mixups might make it more tactical how you attack and then you can choose to not finish combos and do something else to really let people have their guard up and focus alot..
Would like to see experiemtn with holding down the mouse and right button as well and release different attack and even release attacks that cant be parried even. Also the sidestep+attack which gives "free damage" and makes duels about waiting since if you do an attack you will get sidestep+attacked, especially for slower classes but also for fast ones as well. Either way i wont talk more about htat for now.
Although might seem its to much for the offense but wouldnt stop one to think more about defence actually, i think there can be some cool stuff there added that doesnt relolve around free damage or "lame" damage such as sidestep+attack.
Important to reduce the super fast attacks such as warden's zone attack. It might be to fast for the game to handle even with a very good latency. Since its 400ms i think and then it takes around 120+ ms to just switch stance. And probably something more that takes MS. Not sure its possible to consisntently defend against it even if you are 100% awake.
Curious what your thoguhts are on these since you seem to discuss good
Senior Member
Member
Member
I believe that high chip damage on blocks really is the solution, because parries would still have value as a way to avoid chip damage and maybe get a free light. If people tried to parry even hard to parry attacks to avoid chip damage, then it is likely that more attacks would get through and make offense more viable. If people tried to dodge attack more than guadbreaks without a parry would happen more often. I think their should still be heavies on guard breaks, but their shouldn't be guardbreaks on parries, just lights.
