Overhead blocked by teammate who is standing behind a player

[Leshma]

Please fix this. It is an issue for most long weapons, however 2D polearms which main feature is overhead and not stab are almost unusable because of this. There is always a teammate behind, usually a shielder, who stops a overhead mid swing. You have made life easier for 1H players, allowing higher turn rate. You have buffed less used two handed weapons but have completely forgot to fix weapons you've completely ruined with turn rate nerf.

I'm not asking for higher turn rate for those weapons, I'm simply asking for useful overhead.

[Jarlek]

2d polearms really need some love

[NuberT]

you have no idea how annoying that with long maul is..

[Leshma]

Long Maul is a special case of 4D polearm which is so slow that it can be considered as 2D polearm

[Logen]

this issue should've been fixed for all weapons a long time ago, really.

[Smoothrich]

no but you see earlier hit activation on the backswing of every weapon colliding off teammates and terrain is ~~fun and we should be in awe of cmp's technical virtuosity and vision

[Leshma]

Well, weapons colliding with environment and swings being stopped by teammate who stand beside a player does make sense and it is realistic (personally I'm not a fan of this) but overhead shouldn't work like that because real warriors aren't morons to put a weapon in such position where it would get stuck or collide with something behind them.

[Kafein]

It happens a lot with 1h weapons too, as ridiculous as this may sound.

The way weapons collide on objects should be looked at too. 2h can sideswing through walls just fine.

[Angantyr]

+1

That weapon collision is on at all times during an overhead swing sounds good on paper but is a nuisance in practice.

(click to show/hide)

Remember when WB had no environment collision and no team damage whatsoever, crazy days!

[Silveredge]

This is not an issue in my opinion, there are ups and downs to each weapon.  If we remove all of the downsides to weapons it's an overall change in balance.  That aspect of a small weapon's strength would be gone.  There would be no advantage to moving into a tight corridor to fight a player(s) that wield huge polearms.  Or using footwork to make groups of enemies crowd each other, allowing you to survive.

With this change, you're just going to have a huge group of lemmings swinging weapons all over without a care in the world.  There would be no demand for player accuracy or awareness of their environment.  I can see where this would frustrate newer players, just like it frustrated me.  But after becoming very familiar with each aspect of the game you begin to see the necessity of it, and actually start enjoying the challenge behind mastering it.  These difficulties existed in massive medieval combat.  This is why the game is so simple, yet so deep.  It's why it is the game we love to hate.

This would be a bad change.

...because real warriors aren't morons to put a weapon in such position where it would get stuck or collide with something behind them.

Exactly what I'm trying to get at, players don't start off as amazing warriors.

[NuberT]

This is not an issue in my opinion, there are ups and downs to each weapon.  If we remove all of the downsides to weapons it's an overall change in balance.  That aspect of a small weapon's strength would be gone.  There would be no advantage to moving into a tight corridor to fight a player(s) that wield huge polearms.  Or using footwork to make groups of enemies crowd each other, allowing you to survive.

With this change, you're just going to have a huge group of lemmings swinging weapons all over without a care in the world.  There would be no demand for player accuracy or awareness of their environment.  I can see where this would frustrate newer players, just like it frustrated me.  But after becoming very familiar with each aspect of the game you begin to see the necessity of it, and actually start enjoying the challenge behind mastering it.  These difficulties existed in massive medieval combat.  This is why the game is so simple, yet so deep.  It's why it is the game we love to hate.

This would be a bad change.


Exactly what I'm trying to get at, players don't start off as amazing warriors.

The thread is more about being unable to perform overheads with polearms, because teammates, usually shielders, are too stupid to keep some distance behind you - which in case of long maul means, that death is quite certain.. He could as well just stab me in the back .

[Gurnisson]

The way weapons collide on objects should be looked at too. 2h can sideswing through walls just fine.

No, they can't. They're better than polearms in tight areas, sure, but 1H is the best, like it should be.

[Jarlek]

No, they can't. They're better than polearms in tight areas, sure, but 1H is the best, like it should be.

Have you played siege lately? It's shit easy to swing through doors, walls and other "solid" objects with my 2h.

[Shpritza]

Please fix this. It is an issue for most long weapons, however 2D polearms which main feature is overhead and not stab are almost unusable because of this. There is always a teammate behind, usually a shielder, who stops a overhead mid swing. You have made life easier for 1H players, allowing higher turn rate. You have buffed less used two handed weapons but have completely forgot to fix weapons you've completely ruined with turn rate nerf.

I'm not asking for higher turn rate for those weapons, I'm simply asking for useful overhead.

what do u care u quit the game. 

[Kafein]

No, they can't. They're better than polearms in tight areas, sure, but 1H is the best, like it should be.

1h are best because they are a healthy 30 units shorter. That does not change the fact that 2h and polearms can swing with their weapon models phasing through walls, whereas 1h can not, or significantly less, especially on the right swing.