Buff polearm length and thrust damage, nerf (swing) speed

[zagibu]

Seriously, a pike doing 24 pierce damage and a fucking 1h sword doing 29? Not to mention that it's so easy to block a pike, as there are only stabs and overheads...
And why exactly is an overhead of my halberd shorter than the swing of a 2h cleaver?

[Xant]

Pike is good.

[Freland]

Pike has 26 pierce, is pretty cheap and isn't meant to be great 1vs1 because it's an anti cav support weapon.

[zagibu]

Pike has 26 pierce, is pretty cheap and isn't meant to be great 1vs1 because it's an anti cav support weapon.

Even if it had more damage, it would still not be great in duels, because it's ridiculously easy to block and only whiffs in close combat situations.

I'm not only talking about the pike, but about spear weapons in general. I think the game could be a lot more fun if spears were longer and did more damage, but were even worse in duels. Spear formations could actually become hard to break, possibly needing the use of ranged weapons. Right now, the game is mostly a duel simulator, there is not much actual warfare going on. I think this could be changed, if weapon advantages and disadvantages were more pronounced. Right now, a warspear is just a cheaper and worse 2h sword.

One thing that also bothered me lately is that the shaft of a polearm seems to be able to do as much damage as the head. Poleaxe facehuggers don't seem to whiff very often. That's why you see polearmers fight exactly in the same way as 2h sworders. This would actually be a big advantage of 2h swords, to be able to do damage from very close to medium range. Polearms would be medium to long range. It is a little like this with the polearms that have no sideswings already, but it needs to be like this for poleaxes, hafted blades, hafted maces, etc. too. To compensate, they should get a damage and length buff.

[Siiem]

Ever heard in history about people dueling with spears? I think not, it's a cheap weapon for peasents. Used en masse.

[Cyclopsided]

Well, they can't buff the length unless they modified all the models or made a new animation, which they won't do.

They could lower weapon speed, lower swing damage, and increase thrust damage. I think that is what you are suggesting?

[zagibu]

Ever heard in history about people dueling with spears? I think not, it's a cheap weapon for peasents. Used en masse.

So, you are supporting my suggestions? That spears get more thrust damage, lose swing damage and speed but get longer?

Making the models longer shouldn't be a problem, I can do it, if necessary.

[IG_Saint]

One thing that also bothered me lately is that the shaft of a polearm seems to be able to do as much damage as the head. Poleaxe facehuggers don't seem to whiff very often. That's why you see polearmers fight exactly in the same way as 2h sworders. This would actually be a big advantage of 2h swords, to be able to do damage from very close to medium range. Polearms would be medium to long range. It is a little like this with the polearms that have no sideswings already, but it needs to be like this for poleaxes, hafted blades, hafted maces, etc. too. To compensate, they should get a damage and length buff.

That's a problem with the warband system. There's no way to correct that, taleworlds tried with the weapon sweet spots and failed.

[Seawied]

That's a problem with the warband system. There's no way to correct that, taleworlds tried with the weapon sweet spots and failed.

They didn't fail, they were just limited by the capacity of the engine. The sweet spot system is still much better than it was before, but  there needs to be a lot of improvement.



As for polearms: No, speed, damage and length are fine. Don't fix what isn't broke

[Mouse]

I think thrust damage is far too low across the board for almost all weapons. It seems the rule of thumb used for swords was to make thrust damage 2/3 the value of slash damage, then make it pierce instead of cut. I never understood lowering the damage on thrusts like that because 20 pierce doesn't compare to 30 cut. Even against full black plate armor and gauntlets the pierce attack doesn't catch up in damage (30c or 20p + PS 6 + WPF 130 vs 72 armor = 7 cut or just 4.5 pierce damage on average), yet I'm quite confident being slashed with a sword is easier to survive than being impaled on one. That decision only makes sense to me if piercing attacks get a damage bonus for hitting the head that other weapons don't get.

[UrLukur]

I think thrust damage is far too low across the board for almost all weapons. It seems the rule of thumb used for swords was to make thrust damage 2/3 the value of slash damage, then make it pierce instead of cut. I never understood lowering the damage on thrusts like that because 20 pierce doesn't compare to 30 cut. Even against full black plate armor and gauntlets the pierce attack doesn't catch up in damage (30c or 20p + PS 6 + WPF 130 vs 72 armor = 7 cut or just 4.5 pierce damage on average), yet I'm quite confident being slashed with a sword is easier to survive than being impaled on one. That decision only makes sense to me if piercing attacks get a damage bonus for hitting the head that other weapons don't get.

It's 29/25.

[Bobthehero]

Also pierce do x3 whenever you hit the head, means a headstab is a lot less forgivable than a faceslash (specially with 9 ps  )

[bruce]

Ever heard in history about people dueling with spears?

Yes? Herp derp.

For instance, poleaxe techniques (which were used by armoured knights and men at arms, both for battlefield use and for dueling) inherited a lot from quarterstaff fighting techniques.

[Gorath]

Ever heard in history about people dueling with spears?

Yes actually.  Many people throughout history dueled with spears, and probably far more often than swords.  During the bronze era for instance (or whatever it's called) more often than not greek soldiers would duel with spears.

The germanic peoples developed extremeley intricate spear based martial arts and dueled with them quite often, as well as poleaxes and such which were derived alot from spear/staff techniques.

Also spear based combat was HUGELY developed in the eastern areas (china, japan, the rest of the asia's) and was utilized far more often than swords.

The spear has been a major part of human history and warfare since it's creation, the only other weapon rivaling it's importance probably being the bow.

[Boss_Awesome]

Ever heard in history about people dueling with spears? I think not, it's a cheap weapon for peasents. Used en masse.

I've seen enough Jet Li movies to know how effective a spear is for dueling in the right hands.  But then again, Jackie Chan could win a duel with just a ladder.