This double hit business

[Kafein]

Thank you, whatever people that decided this was better left for better games like WoTR and chivalry.

[Paul]

We'll have a more sophisticated turnrate handling next patch.

(click to show/hide)

Currently the  turnrate is 7 during an attack. Native is 14.
With the change it will be:

1h_turnrate   =clamp(14-0.15*weight-0.06*(length-75), 7, 14)
2h_turnrate   =clamp(14-0.14*weight-0.08*(length-90), 5, 11)
pole_turnrate =clamp(13-0.18*weight-0.04*(length-140), 5, 11)
weight in 0.1kg

Example: short sword [weight=10; length=81; 1h]
1h_turnrate(short sword)=clamp(14-0.15*10-0.06*(81-75), 7, 14)=12.14

Example: great maul [weight=80; length=68; 2h]
1h_turnrate(great maul)=clamp(14-0.14*80-0.08*(68-90), 5, 11)=clamp(4.56, 5, 11)=5

[Piok]

No shield weight in

[Kafein]

We'll have a more sophisticated turnrate handling next patch.

(click to show/hide)

Currently the  turnrate is 7 during an attack. Native is 14.
With the change it will be:

1h_turnrate   =clamp(14-0.15*weight-0.06*(length-75), 7, 14)
2h_turnrate   =clamp(14-0.14*weight-0.08*(length-90), 5, 11)
pole_turnrate =clamp(13-0.18*weight-0.04*(length-140), 5, 11)
weight in 0.1kg

Example: short sword [weight=10; length=81; 1h]
1h_turnrate(short sword)=clamp(14-0.15*10-0.06*(81-75), 7, 14)=12.14

Example: great maul [weight=80; length=68; 2h]
1h_turnrate(great maul)=clamp(14-0.14*80-0.08*(68-90), 5, 11)=clamp(4.56, 5, 11)=5

Looks great, thumbs up !

No shield weight in

Why would it matter ? You hold your shield very close to you, the energy required to turn with it is minimal. And it wouldn't make much sense from a balance point of view either, although I'm pretty sure our views wildly differ on that subject.

[Piok]

There is calculation for dagger and with no doubt shield will affect turn rate more than dagger.

[Teeth]

13-0.18*25-0.04*(245-140) = 8.5

Muwhahaha

[Phew]

There is calculation for dagger and with no doubt shield will affect turn rate more than dagger.

If you include shield weight, you might as well include armor weight. Neither is swinging with your weapon, and both are close to your body.

[Elindor]

If you include shield weight, you might as well include armor weight. Neither is swinging with your weapon, and both are close to your body.

I could see if affected turn speed a bit, but hopefully not much...especially for lighter shields.

--------------

cmp/Paul.....great stuff.  That new formula is great and the outcome on balancing longer/heavier weapons with shorter/lighter ones will be much needed and an overall game improvement and really a boost to the way Warband handles physics for longer and heavier weapons.  Hopefully the end gameplay result will be better balance.

[Elmuri]

Could you somehow spare long maul being nerfed, it's not like its too good now..

[Largg]

Will be nice to see same variety in turn speeds but it works quite odd for some weapons. Take 2-directional polearms for example. Most of them will be even worse than what they are now. For example swiss halberd will be 6.72 and engilsh bill 5. They were never buffed after the initial turn rate implementation although I think it was planned. They've never been op weapons and I'd like to see some buffs for them.

[XyNox]

If you include shield weight, you might as well include armor weight. Neither is swinging with your weapon, and both are close to your body.

Additional turnspeed-nerf for tincans is actually one of the most reasonable suggestions I've read in a while.

[Dezilagel]

So practically no weapons will turn at native speed. 

Personally, I think at least the lighter and shorter weapons in each category should turn at normal speed, and most at a boosted one from what we have now (7), with harsh penalties coming in play for the more 'extreme' ones.

Here are some reworked formulas that I think are better:

1h_turnrate   =clamp(16-0.48(weight/10)^2-0.09*(length-65), 7, 14)
2h_turnrate   =clamp(16-0.48(weight/10)^2-0.09*(length-85), 5, 14)
pole_turnrate =clamp(16-0.64(weight/10)^2-0.04*(length-135), 5, 14)

Examples:

1h_turnrate(short sword)   =clamp(16-0.48(10/10)^2-0.09*(81-65), 7, 14) = clamp(14.08, 7, 14)=14

1h_turnrate(warhammer)   =clamp(16-0.48(25/10)^2-0.09*(65-65), 7, 14) = 13

1h_turnrate(nordic champion's sword)   =clamp(16-0.48(10/10)^2-0.09*(102-65), 7, 14) = 12.19

1h_turnrate(military cleaver)  =clamp(16-0.48(25/10)^2-0.09*(92-65), 7, 14) = 10.57

1h_turnrate(iron war axe)  =clamp(16-0.48(30/10)^2-0.09*(69-65), 7, 14) = 11.32

Comments: All 1h have a high turnrate, but the longest and heaviest ones still suffer noticeable penalties. Reasoning behind this is that 1h were hit way too hard by the turnnerf considering how annoying their stabs in particular are to use. This will also help promote the 1h short swords, who are underused compared to thir longer cousins (read: were before the turnrate nerf, I personally haven't played much since).



2h_turnrate(katana) =clamp(16-0.48(15/10)^2-0.09*(95-85), 4, 14) = 14.02

2h_turnrate(morningstar) =clamp(16-0.48(35/10)^2-0.09*(82-85), 4, 14) = 10.39

2h_turnrate(flamberge) =clamp(16-0.48(40/10)^2-0.09*(152-85), 4, 14) =clamp(2.29, 5, 14) = 5

2h_turnrate(great maul) =clamp(16-0.48(80/10)^2-0.09*(68-85), 4, 14) =clamp(-13.19, 5, 14) = 5

2h_turnrate(danish greatsword) =clamp(16-0.48(25/10)^2-0.09*(124-85), 4, 14) = 9.49

Comments:

This one was a really tough to balance, mostly since the greatswords are so similar in everything except weight, and the longsword-like 2h being so good. That is a problem with Paul's formula as well; the items aren't balanced for it.
Basic idea though is that the short, light swords turn close to 14, DGS and company around 8-11 and maulers get shanked down to 5.



pole_turnrate(pitch fork) =clamp(16-0.64(15/10)^2-0.04*(154-135), 5, 14) = 13.8

pole_turnrate(quarter staff) =clamp(16-0.64(10/10)^2-0.04*(137-135), 5, 14) = (15.28, 7, 14)=14

pole_turnrate(long bardiche) =clamp(16-0.64(35/10)^2-0.04*(140-135), 5, 14) = 7.96

pole_turnrate(long awlpike) =clamp(16-0.64(28/10)^2-0.04*(185-135), 5, 14) = 8.9824

pole_turnrate(long spear) =clamp(16-0.64(10/10)^2-0.04*(137-135), 5, 14) = 7.6

pole_turnrate(long maul) =clamp(16-0.64(70/10)^2-0.04*(125-135), 5, 14) = clamp(-14.96, 5, 14) = 5

Comments:

I wish you could change the turnrate specifically for 2d polearms, but here I've tried to strike a balance. Staffs and short spears around 13-14, mainstay poles 8-9 and the extreme ones down further. The reason for not making length a bigger factor is because of the 2d poles. Most poles over 150 are 2d. Also: Peasant power! This would give a reason to use pitchforks and the like.

Basically, I think pauls formula is way too harsh. I think that if you want to have a native turnrate, or close to that you should be able to with all weapon classes, and 1h should all be around top turnspeed.

13-0.18*25-0.04*(245-140) = 8.5

Muwhahaha

Nope.

13-0.18*25-0.04*(245-140) = 4.3


EDIT: I couldba'd...

[Teeth]

Aaaargh, misread the * for a ^ when I put it in my calculator. Ah well, longspear has knack for working anyway, whatever happens. 8.36 for the ashwood pike though, we'll see what that brings.

All these changing turn speeds though, seem problematic for someone who switches weapon a lot.

[cmp]

So practically no weapons will turn at native speed. 

No, and it's intended.

[Leshma]

According to your formula, Italian falchion has 14.xx but that's capped at 14 aka native value.