HACKED

[Kulin_ban]

HACKED

[CrazyCracka420]

I've never been a huge fan of instant blocking.  But I thought it was widely known that manual blocking was instantaneous?  Same with having shield speed at 100 or higher.

Only problem I see with this is that people getting over 100 ping already have a really huge disadvantage when trying to block, if there was more delay it makes me wonder if people in the 80-90ms range would start having problems blocking.

[Vibe]

insta block known since the dawn of age, slow shields have delay on blocks, it's gay as fuck, please scrap this thread and throw it in the thrash bin right over there, mister

[Vibe]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Kafein]

You fuckers gave me nothing to read about in the morning.

I will just give you a -

[Paul]

I think delayed blocking has been tested back in Warband beta. It was horrible and everyone hated it. What might be nice instead would be some sort of optimal block time (or animation frame) system. So if you start a block at the ideal moment (not too early or too late) you get a bonus in form of less defender stun and more attacker stun.

In return missing that ideal block moment could then result in more defender stun, keeping the initiative on attacker's side. Missing it too often in a row could even lead to some other sort of punishment like crushthrough or a short turnfreeze/stagger so that an aggressive player can finally overcome the blocking of a defensive player with bad blocktiming.

[Kafein]

I think delayed blocking has been tested back in Warband beta. It was horrible and everyone hated it. What might be nice instead would be some sort of optimal block time (or animation frame) system. So if you start a block at the ideal moment (not too early or too late) you get a bonus in form of less defender stun and more attacker stun.

In return missing that ideal block moment could then result in more defender stun, keeping the initiative on attacker's side. Missing it too often in a row could even lead to some other sort of punishment like crushthrough or a short turnfreeze/stagger so that an aggressive player can finally overcome the blocking of a defensive player with bad blocktiming.

You might want to increase the attacker stun overall to balance it out. Infinite block battles are bad, but allowing spamlocks is very very bad.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

You might want to increase the attacker stun overall to balance it out. Infinite block battles are bad, but allowing spamlocks is very very bad.

This, I can already get stunlocked pretty much eternally by some people.

[Gurnisson]

This, I can already get stunlocked pretty much eternally by some people.

Well, you can at least attack once in every two opponent attacks, whatever happens (unless you fail to close the distance when you're able to attack)

[Teeth]

I've never been a huge fan of instant blocking.  But I thought it was widely known that manual blocking was instantaneous?  Same with having shield speed at 100 or higher.

I've never really been a shielder, but the first thing I noticed with a MW Elite Cav shield on my alt was that the blocking was not instantaneous, there is still a slight delay compared to manual blocking.

I don't see how adding a delay to blocking is better than just speeding up attacks.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

I've never really been a shielder, but the first thing I noticed with a MW Elite Cav shield on my alt was that the blocking was not instantaneous, there is still a slight delay compared to manual blocking.

I don't see how adding a delay to blocking is better than just speeding up attacks.

Because a delay to blocking nerfs skill as blocking multiple opponents who swing near the same time would be somewhat slightly impossible, speeding up attacks makes it harder but still possible, and who wants skill to be a factor in things?

[Phew]

I think delayed blocking has been tested back in Warband beta. It was horrible and everyone hated it. What might be nice instead would be some sort of optimal block time (or animation frame) system. So if you start a block at the ideal moment (not too early or too late) you get a bonus in form of less defender stun and more attacker stun.

In return missing that ideal block moment could then result in more defender stun, keeping the initiative on attacker's side. Missing it too often in a row could even lead to some other sort of punishment like crushthrough or a short turnfreeze/stagger so that an aggressive player can finally overcome the blocking of a defensive player with bad blocktiming.

+1. Paul usually has good ideas for gameplay mechanics. I bet he's behind the turn speed changes on EU_1.

[Tydeus]

I think delayed blocking has been tested back in Warband beta. It was horrible and everyone hated it.

Shik loved it, actually.

I suggest we replace Shik with myself as NA item unbalancer(I'm more like an EU player as far as balance in concerned anyway).

[Rumblood]

I've never really been a shielder, but the first thing I noticed with a MW Elite Cav shield on my alt was that the blocking was not instantaneous, there is still a slight delay compared to manual blocking.

I don't see how adding a delay to blocking is better than just speeding up attacks.

Yep, true. I have to account for this, especially against charging ponies.