[Poll] Alternative 2h stab animations.

[Jack1]

Awlpike takes a wiggle stab to not glance in any decent armor, every time. Morningstar doesn't take such  manipulation.  Whether or not you consider that a skill is up to you, but most people will argue that is harder than not having to wiggle every time.

I don't think you fought somebody who knows how to use an awlpike then. knitler can show you if you want to go to EU.

Lol you guys are just bad if you think it's a nerf.

Scrubs.

Do you have any other arguments other than just opinions?

[Bjord]

I don't think you fought somebody who knows how to use an awlpike then. knitler can show you if you want to go to EU.
Do you have any other arguments other than just opinions?

Still didn't get an answer to my question.

How is this animation *WORSE*?

Because it's shorter?

[Jack1]

Still didn't get an answer to my question.

How is this animation *WORSE*?

Because it's shorter?

if the stab animation is changed to something shorter it would be a large nerf. it would bring the length comparisons between 2h and polearms unimaginable.

[MURDERTRON]

Because if you take away the 2h stab animation and turn it into something worse than it currently is it would be a nerf to a class that is already worse in a competitive standpoint and still will be after the patch.

They're getting rid of insta hitting on the two swing directions. Something that they did to 2h's a long time ago. True, it is a nerf but it still will leave polearm users with the largest advantage in both 1v1's and groupfights because of their array of weapon choices.


That is an opinionated answer. You're also forgetting that awlpike is a much better weapon in the length category. With a Morningstar you have to W key and block about 3 hits from 3 opponents before you get the chance to swing.

Edit for bjord:
But now you're comparing weapons of different lengths which give advantages in different areas. The same thing can be said about the long axe going after a flamberger. Once you get past the length you have every advantage in the world over your counterpart.

I think saying polearms are better for group fights is pretty absurd.  Even if the weapons are on even footing in terms if damage and speed, the polearm has to deal with its backswings and having the most turn restriction.  I've had my backswings blocked by teammates countless times in groups fights, and the game offers very little indication that it had happened.  I generally just end up sitting there wondering where my swing went and why my opponent is not dead, only to realize there is a Black Company shielded just hanging out, having a good time and employing Black Company's famous teamwork.  Also, every bit of length added to a polearm comes with a penalty for movement speed, and I believe that penalty is worse than 2h.  And let's not forget that 2h animations generally add length, while polearms generally lose length, so that means polearms are paying for their length twice.

[Bjord]

if the stab animation is changed to something shorter it would be a large nerf. it would bring the length comparisons between 2h and polearms unimaginable.

"Unimaginable?"

I can't believe I'm reading this.

Either you are a shit player who relies on one-off strategies to get ahead and have no idea about the mechanics or you honestly think the animation is going to be intentionally "nerfed". The notion that you refer to it as a nerf is quite hilarious, really.

First of all, we have no real reference as of yet to what the new animation will look like entirely, but judging by those two frames, the sweet spot hit activates faster, reaches its maximum reach faster and also allows you to utilize speed bonus from movement faster.

Speaking as a seasoned 2H-player, this will benefit feinting, positioning and damage output.

Sure, it's shorter - but shorter means faster and speed > reach.

[Tydeus]

I think a better way to put into words Jack1's argument, is to argue from the perspective of what the aggregate have. So ignore individual weapons, and focus on generalizations about the classes. It's not actually as weak of an argument as the word "generalization" might seem to imply as ultimately, it's about class identity.

If there is one thing that two-handed swords have going for them over any other weapon type, it's the two-handed thrust. More than anything else, this is what most people will consider as their single largest, class-defining advantage. They have good animations, sure, but the other weapon types' animations aren't behind by enough (thanks to past tweaks), to be able to say any longer, that animations are where they have the edge. In general, two-handed swords are balanced around being quite generic, as opposed to the high versatility and utility that 1h and polearms provide. Not specializing in any one thing, not having high utility or any one stat or feature that makes them "the best" in that category, with the exception of their thrust.

I'm not sure it will kill the class, but without a doubt, you can't take away this advantage, not reimburse them with anything else, and consider them unharmed on the class–balance spectrum. To make matters worse though, simply reimbursing by granting additional damage won't really address this issue either. The two-handed swords will still be at risk of losing their identity.

Lastly, I should probably say that while I'm very hesitant of this change, I'm not strictly opposed to its implementation either.

[Camaris]

I dont like the current 2h-stab as 2h player. So lets try next version (6th try in 2 years ???)

[Bjord]

I think a better way to put into words Jack1's argument, is to argue from the perspective of what the aggregate have. So ignore individual weapons, and focus on generalizations about the classes. It's not actually as weak of an argument as the word "generalization" might seem to imply as ultimately, it's about class identity.

If there is one thing that two-handed swords have going for them over any other weapon type, it's the two-handed thrust. More than anything else, this is what most people will consider as their single largest, class-defining advantage. They have good animations, sure, but the other weapon types' animations aren't behind by enough (thanks to past tweaks), to be able to say any longer, that animations are where they have the edge. In general, two-handed swords are balanced around being quite generic, as opposed to the high versatility and utility that 1h and polearms provide. Not specializing in any one thing, not having high utility or any one stat or feature that makes them "the best" in that category, with the exception of their thrust.

I'm not sure it will kill the class, but without a doubt, you can't take away this advantage, not reimburse them with anything else, and consider them unharmed on the class–balance spectrum. To make matters worse though, simply reimbursing by granting additional damage won't really address this issue either. The two-handed swords will still be at risk of losing their identity.

Lastly, I should probably say that while I'm very hesitant of this change, I'm not strictly opposed to its implementation either.

Of course they lose their identity, the animation is completely altered and whatever feel you had for the thrust will have to be re-learned. Isn't that a given?

However, assuming that the animation is good and that it offers a way of killing your enemies, then what's the issue?

Now it seems more realistic and offers a fighting style more in the spirit of two-handed fighting rather than trying to catch your opponent off-guard with the often unexpected reach advantage of the thrust.

The way it works now and always did was an eyesore, but it was the best thing we had. Despite being one of the most prominent 2h stab abusers, I never liked that way of fighting. 2h is a quick and deadly class, not the retarded step brother of polearms, who are almost all about reach and positioning.

However, when it all boils down it is useless to speculate until it's been at least tested.

That's why you shouldn't talk like you're the Messiah of two-handers all over the world, preaching about "Unimaginable" doom following the change of thrust.

[Tydeus]

Of course they lose their identity, the animation is completely altered and whatever feel you had for the thrust will have to be re-learned. Isn't that a given?

However, assuming that the animation is good and that it offers a way of killing your enemies, then what's the issue?

Lots of things. Some of what I said in my post, as well.

To a degree, effectiveness or stats alone, can be irrelevant. Probably the best case one can bring up, is the Highland Claymore. Realistically, it has the most favorable trade-offs with all other greatswords, and yet it's just about the least used.

Next, it's rather difficult to talk about the effectiveness and proper reimbursements needed for the reach loss of the animation. Currently, with a greatsword and a well timed thrust, you can fight lancers fairly well, almost on equal footing. Unfortunately, you can only, just barely, do this. The reach with the thrust and weapon lengths as they are, is such that you fall within only a few cm of effective reach as a Heavy Lance user, one reason many players choose greatswords over bastard swords. When facing hoplites, you're only slightly disadvantaged in length and with good footwork and timing, can sometimes seem as though you have superior reach. There is also a bit to be said about the current effective reach vs other melee weapons. Any reduction to effective reach (and that is one of the main intentions behind this change), will very likely destroy what utility there is in the current 2h thrust.

Finally, there are a large number of players who will choose to not play crpg (or quit), simply because the animation differences cause the mod to feel like it is too significantly different from native. This is one reason I had to try to keep any animation tweaks I made as visually similar to their native versions as possible. You cannot underestimate the negative impacts this could have. Doing so is simply naive.

[Senni__Ti]

I'll have a length comparison and the rest of the anims soon for testing. (At which point I'll make a video)

Roughly at this point:

The tip extends to ~185, with the old anim it's ~226.

-41 reach on the current 2h stab, which I think is at 90 atm(?).
So 49+ reach with this stab.

However, looking more closely at the old anim, the arms literally go through each other for the last couple of frames.
At the longest reaching frame, the left hand is solidly inside the right arm. Mine will never be able to reach that far (unless I too clip).

I'll continue tweaking, so it may close the gap a little, but it will be a pretty big knock on the length.

[Tydeus]

I'll have a length comparison and the rest of the anims soon for testing. (At which point I'll make a video)

Roughly at this point:

The tip extends to ~185, with the old anim it's ~226.

-41 reach on the current 2h stab, which I think is at 90 atm(?).
So 49+ reach with this stab.

However, looking more closely at the old anim, the arms literally go through each other for the last couple of frames.
At the longest reaching frame, the left hand is solidly inside the right arm. Mine will never be able to reach that far (unless I too clip).

I'll continue tweaking, so it may close the gap a little, but it will be a pretty big knock on the length.

Keep in mind, effective reach for thrusts isn't about how far the anim reaches, but how far it can reach while staying within both the inner most (where damage is at 100%) and upper-inner(Where damage begins to decrease and ultimately reach 0%) areas of the sweetspot.

This graph shows the current thrust sweetspots in green.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


So any further extensions after about 73%(which is roughly a 70% raw damage reduction), don't really matter at all.

[MURDERTRON]

Keep in mind, effective reach for thrusts isn't about how far the anim reaches, but how far it can reach while staying within both the inner most (where damage is at 100%) and upper-inner(Where damage begins to decrease and ultimately reach 0%) areas of the sweetspot.

This graph shows the current thrust sweetspots in green.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


So any further extensions after about 73%(which is roughly a 70% raw damage reduction), don't really matter at all.

Both are important, tydeus.  We know you don't need 100% to destroy a horse, because they are providing a tremendous speed bonus.  On the flip side, it's usually better to to whiff than to over reach and glance because of the timing penalty.

I find your hoplite vs 2h sword reach argument a bit strange though.  Most 2hers would seldomly stab a hoplite since they will suffer a great weapon stun for hitting the shield.  Meanwhile a 2her suffers the least movement penalty, only second to a swashbuckler, so it should be easy to overrun a hoplite.

[Jona]

I find your hoplite vs 2h sword reach argument a bit strange though.

Yeah, I kinda feel like Tydeus was just grasping at straws coming up with the whole "2h stab must be longer than horse lance or hoplite stab!" thing. Regardless, the fact that this could even be considered a valid argument just shows how spoiled the 2h class has been this whole time. I can't think of any 4D polearms that would even be able to somewhat reliably outstab (or even stand a chance with any swing againt) a lancer's stab, other than the long voulge, which can't even rear the horse, or the fauchard, which no one uses since its simply garbage, or the military scythe, which frankly isn't too common either. The glaive might be able to stand a chance, but I don't think anyone with a glaive would ever try to outstab a lancer when they could hop safely to the side and rightswing. The only people who should ever even think of stabbing against lancers head-on would be long 2-directional poles or the 1-directionals.

There is no reason losing reach on the 2h stab would be so insanely detrimental when the animation may end up acting more like the 1h stab and give absurd speed (in return for the lost reach). The 1h stab  accelerates through the animation so fast that it can pretty much hit without glancing at full extension. If the new 2h stab acts like that, while the old 2h stab (supposedly) could only hit at 70% extension, then the reach lost isn't that major anyways.

Also, on the whole argument for why so many people choose polearms over 2h nowadays... don't people ever consider that it might not be a contest over which class is more OP than the other, but simply a contest of which class players find more fun? I was a long time 2h player before I finally switched to polearm. I did so because at the time polearm had yet to be buffed and I had finally gotten to a point where I could be considered a decent player, and realized how OP 2h was. Of course only a short while after switching over the pole animations were buffed, which then led to a whole lot more people switching over. But did they all switch over because polearm was OP, or because it could finally stand on its own against 2h? Same goes for 1h after the 1h swing buffs... you see a lot more swashbucklers nowadays. Is it because it has become OP, or because it finally doesn't suck to play? Tryhard/KD-whore players have been stuck playing 2h for so long so they could perform well. Would it be so unreasonable to assume that they switched over to poles/1h because they were sick and tired of being limited to one class for what... 2, 3 years?

After the pole animations got buffed I considered going back to 2h since I hadn't been playing a polearm all that long (by comparison to my 2h time, anyways). But the reason I stayed as a polearm was because I realized it was simply more fun to play. I didn't do the same thing over and over and over again to beat people like I would find myself doing as a 2hander (grab a sword, feint overhead/stab, spam leftswings). Instead polearms offered a lot more variety and I would be able to choose a completely different playstyle when I got bored of the last. Polearms just have a lot more variety than 2h weapons do... your choices are more than just "sword, fast sword, long sword, longer sword, longest sword, 3-directional sword, longer 3-directional sword, good stabbing sword, good slashing sword...etc." and more variety often allows for more fun. With this upcoming patch it seems that 2h will be getting a good amount of new stuff added, new stuff that isn't just new swords, mind you, so that should definitely help more people stay as 2h because they will have more variety than ever before.

[Senni__Ti]

updated, longer reach, looks slightly better.

[Teeth]

How is this animation *WORSE*?

Because it's shorter?

You'd be foolish to not appreciate the utility that having one attack with 80 more reach than the others brings you in battle. Greatswords have three great swings up close and a stab that compares to 165 reach polearm stabs. That is without counting the extra effective reach achieved by walking during the very long animation. This versatility is what makes Greatswords such consistently great battle weapons. Anyone attacking a teammate within your stab reach has to pay attention to you. In a ganking situation you can stab around or over your teammates to get the kill. Many lancers never even attack an aware player with a Greatsword. Do a stab and you suddenly turn into some sort of support polearmer. Take away the 165 reach stab and there will be a host of situations where you will no longer be able to threaten opponents anymore, which has huge consequences.

So yes, if judging purely from the animation, a shorter animation would be profoundly worse as it will offer less extra utility next to the swings.