Through everything I only disagree with this, the reason is that… well, I think this game is mostly about the combat and what can you do. I want to miss so I will get punished, for example you can miss in mount and blade and you will get hit. This kind of ‘experience’ is on consoles when you play call of duty or other fps game where the crosshair kind of follows your opponent a bit, assisting you. Instead of removing it, I would rather have it as a difficulty option that you could change to make it more realistic, I would rather press W and then LMB so he will make the move and strike, not just press LMB and he will move and strike at the same time. As in giving the player more choice of realistic gameplay, rather than just hack and slash.
1 Like
I think that it is right decision. Blocing should be a reflexive, automatic action. You do not make much choices here (well you can but that should be made in another way). And since it´s an RPG that is exactly what should depend more on Henrys skill.
3 Likes
Mount and blade and chivalry have 4 angles of attack. In this game you could have six aimed at various heights and stabbing attacks to different places in the body.
2 Likes
Distance and tempo are both crucial parameters in fencing, but I honestly think that there is no way you can make a “decent”, interactive fencing simulation, even with the best intention. For example, I think it would be really hard to simulate the weight, so the inertia of the body. Thinking about “oh, I should attack now” while in the middle of a backwards movement necessarily makes a delay in action, while in the game, you press W, and just after a few milliseconds, your character goes forward - in some bad cases, without even accelerating to the ‘maximum speed’ first.
And that was an “easy” problem, I didn’t mention the almost infinite ways two swords can meet and interact with each other, didn’t mention the chaotic nature of processes what can happen sword-on-sword, and so on.
Therefore, I expect KCD to be a historically accurate game (carrots, I look at you! 
), with enjoyable, believable and not too easy, but mostly fun and not boring combat system. If it will have a one button block, or fixed distance - so be it, it still could be really good.
…but also bad, of course. (Like my english. 
)
2 Likes
Chivalry actually have, in theory, an infinite amount of possible angles of attack, though in practice a finite, though still a very high number. Yes, you do have less types of attacks in Chivalry than in KC:D, you actually have five, not four as you claim. These are; left swing, right swing, left overhead, right overhead, and poke. Quite similar to KC:D. However, unlike in KC:D, these types does not decide where you swing. If you do a right swing aiming at your opponent’s head, your opponent will have to aim high in order to block, more specifically at the tip of your weapon. If you do a right swing aiming at your opponent’s feet, your opponent will have to aim low in order to block. You can aim exactly where you want using your mouse, and thus the opponent must read exactly where the swing is coming and aim at that specific point as well, unlike in M&B or KC:D where you use predeterment directions. So the free aiming combined with the five different types of attacks creates quite a lot of possibilities, and yet still the free aiming blocking system works perfectly fine.
Sorry for the weird, barely readable ramble, but it’s the middle of night and I’m very tired.
1 Like
Pretty sure this has already been fixed, we discussed it Here (starts with linked post to the end of the thread)
I would like this as well, I like the sound of a combat system that actually took time and effort to learn how to use and become efficient with.
2 Likes
I would back you up for directional blocking!
Directional blocking should also be one button, just like in Chivalry. It doesn’t matter if the same system will be used for Deliverance or @warhorse could make something different (and/or better), but the one button block with some direction pointing should be considered.
Manual blocking is so good for a true hardcore gamer and an automatic blocking is so dumbed down. I sincerelly hope devs could re-think about giving us (all hardcore PC backers) what we desire and implement their initial idea of directional blocking, at least for the “Hardcore” mode. This way we will be most pleased and immersed and whoever wants automatic blocking could always turn-off direction blocking and play as he wish.
And I don’t agree that learning to play with directional blocking would require so much efforts from any average player. Lets consider Warband and Chivalry. I usually dislike multiplayer and don’t play it, but I own both games and I used to play multiplayer on them for some time, with manual blocking in Warband and with default blocking system in Chivalry. I can say that after several minutes I started making frags and after several hours I already played decently given the fact I was new. And the pleasure of dueling was so intense with completely manual controls
Because I don’t like crosshairs in any FPS games, I prefer to play without them. But in Chivalry it can’t happen, because I won’t be able to block. So the system is not entirelly applicable to Deliverance, at least for everybody who hates crosshairs on their screens (or dots). But if the system is tweaked in a way so that you only have to look at your opponent’s weapon whilst it attacks and click the block button with proper timing… This would be great - you will have manual directional blocking and it will be a simple one button action with correct mouse movement for those with the desire to play it. 
Thanks for reading!
2 Likes
Don’t jump the gun on that conclusion. Just 50 years before the game the main language of state written communication was Latin, while main language of the court was French (it both changed to Czech between 1350 and the game’s time, with German language playing increasingly insignificant role until the Habsburg-Catholic occupation that started after 1620). Before establishment of the Charles University, Czech nobility would send their sons to Italy and especially France to learn at Universities, not to Germany (there were no universities anyway). Use of sword was something they were expected to learn there.
1 Like
The matter is VERY complicated by the fact that I don’t believe there was a distinct regional style of longsword per se – the techniques and guards presented in the German, Italian, and English manuscripts are very similar – but there is a distinction in the approach (IE while techniques are the same, the German fechtbuchen tend to favor a much more aggressive approach than those of the Italians).
There’s certainly more than enough evidence that teaching of martial arts was handled domestically. Ringeck operated in Germany, and he may have been contemporary with the setting of KC:D (his origins are somewhat unclear, depending heavily on WHICH Albrecht he was contemporary of). Stettner, the master of Paulus Kal, may also have been contemporary to the setting, while the Kal’s list of the Society of Liechtenauer entirely consists of masters who would have lived in the Holy Roman Empire (and none further south than Austria) and notably excludes Fiore dei Liberi, who may have been a student of Liechtenauer himself.
Furthermore, keep in mind that the fencing guilds of the era were HIGHLY territorial even during this early stage.
When I fight, I do not look at my sparring partner’s weapon, nor do I need to. I watch his entire body, by doing this I know when he will attack, the manner in which he will attack, and where his weapon will be so that I can displace it. I do not think about where the attack is coming from, I have dealt with pretty much every way a person can hew or thrust many times, and so I displace it viscerally, it just happens like if I had just pressed a button. Also, since I usually try to displace attacks with an attack of my own, I am likely to miss or just graze my opponent if I am overly concerned with watching his weapon. Finally, by watching his entire body, I can better perceive when he will feint, strike me with his shield/buckler, go for his knife, or even try to grapple. Looking at the weapon is a good way to take a buckler to the teeth.
Another thing to keep in mind is that Chiv is much slower than an actual fight. In Chiv, you cock your weapon back as far as you can, hold it there for a bit, and then swing like your weapon weighs as much as you do. In a real fight, you are pretty much always holding your weapon cocked back (while still closing off a line), and then you suddenly spring forth as fast as you can, so that your opponent has only a split second to react.
4 Likes
The problem with this is that it makes the combat more mechanical. Keep in mind that you are operating with a artificial proxy (keyboard/gamepad) and that you do not have proper depth perception when looking at a screen. When I am sparring, that one or two steps it takes to connect my hew/thrust just kinda happens, it is very natural; the same does not hold true when play chivalry/waroftheroses/mountandblade, it feels more like plotting the course of a rocket than it feels like fighting.
EDIT: Also, if the game has adjustable FoV, like any proper PC game does, changing the FoV changes your depth perception.
4 Likes
Yes, that is indeed very true, you don’t necessarily need to look straight at your opponent’s weapon to block. However, just like you said, you do need to know where your opponent is, in which manner he/she will be attacking, and where and when he/she will attack. I don’t think that the mouse button should simulate where your character’s looking, I’d say your own eyes should. Just because you have your crosshair set at a specific place doesn’t mean you can’t look at another. This is also why I’m not particularly a big fan of depth of field. Concerning the “I do not think about where the attack is coming from”, I can as a Chivalry player confirm that this also applies to the game. Just like in real sword fighting as you explains it, after getting used to the game you don’t really have to think about the directional blocking. You just have to observe the opponents movement and the rest comes quite natural.
Although you do make a great point in that KC:D’s combat will most likely, or at least hopefully, be a lot faster, which of course makes the free aiming blocking harder. However, I’d still say that some form of directional blocking is required to make the combat interesting and immersive, whether that be more like Chivalry’s free aiming system, which I personally would prefer, or more like M&B’s choose-between-four-directions kind of thing.
Edit: Although after watching the combat video blog again I noticed that the speed different isn’t that much. This may of course be tweaked, or it perhaps already has, and they’re hopefully going to make it a bit more fluent.
Thanks for the reply though, always nice to hear what people with actual sword fighting experience have to say about the combat system.
Im not a sword warrior, but I did a lot of different types of martial arts, from thai boxing to boxing to MMA, and I must say that I guess its very similar then to hand to hand combat. When I fight, I dont look at my oponents hands but at his whole body, how he moves it determines how he will hit.
I can see where you are coming from. I still don’t agree with you, but I understand your reasoning, and I don’t really think either of us are going change our minds as we both seem pretty set in our opinions.
Maybe if I played Chiv some more its blocking would have gotten more natural. I tried it, but stopped because I didn’t feel that the advantages of the heavier classes/weapons made up for the great disadvantages when compared to the lighter classes/weapons. It has been a while so maybe they balanced it by now, but I typically don’t enjoy games do not make heavy kits worth the trouble.
Heavier classes have HUGE advantages against lighter classes. The knight can take a huge amount of punishments from both the Archer and Man at arms class. They also have weapons that deal good damage and will one shot the Archer and Man at arms pretty easily if you hit them in the head. The vanguard is op in my opinion they have the longest reaching most damaging weapons in the game(with the exception of the maul which is knight only). They can take a decent amount of punishment as well. So yes there are huge advantages playing as knight. You can only be insta killed by the pole hammer charge to the head or heavy crossbow to the head. Sure the lighter classes may be faster than me but i can take at least 3-4 hits from them before i go down and i can one shot them easily. Overall i think its balanced quite well i still have troubles taking down Man at arms using the knight but as i said if they screw up once they’re dead. It has gone through tons of combat patches since launch so you may find it a different game.
I also might add the bullshit chase mechanic that they added means if you are an archer or man at arms any class can catch you by staring at your ass even if they’re fully armored and you are wearing no armor.
Why’s that bullshit? Wearing armor doesn’t slow you down, ESPECIALLY over short distances. I can run just as fast in my armor as I can without it. It just takes more energy to do so.
So you’re telling me you could catch a guy wearing nothing who has a head start on you when you have full plate and running with a 2 handed weapon with a helmet covering your entire face and you wouldn’t tire quicker or get heat stroke? You’re wearing extra weight period i doubt you can catch a man wearing clothing that doesn’t even weigh a pound. And the knights wearing what? 30-45 pounds extra weight? They would both be in good shape one is wearing more weight the other is not so how does a guy wearing extra weight run down and kill a guy who is in just as good of shape wearing nothing? It screws with the balance of the game. The archer can be insta killed be most of the knights weapons and its not hard to evade arrows long enough to close the distance and kill the archer. On top of that it takes 2-3 arrows with the most powerful in the game to bring down the knight which im okay with but its retarted that the knight just gets to run down the archer constantly.
How big of a lead and over how much distance? I’ve run down plenty of guys with a head start while in my armor. I’ve also had plenty of guys outrun me, because they’re just plain faster than me and someone I wouldn’t have been able to catch WITHOUT my armor.
Don’t take artificial and arbitrary game balance and try to apply it to real armor. Real life doesn’t have a sprint meter.
2 Likes
Any distance as long as they’re staring at your back then can easily run you down. The archer is the second fastest class in the game and they need to be for balance. They can be one shot by almost any weapon the vanguard and knight use not to mention their melee weapons are very weak since they took out the back stab bonus they got in combat.
The Knight shouldn’t be able to catch the Archer. The archer is supposed to be faster but if the knight looks at the archers ass he magically gets faster thats what i have a problem with. They are both in equal shape but the knight is wearing more weight and the archer is wearing nothing. They nerfed the Archer hard because people who suck at knight were getting shit on by archers in melee. But now they leave Archers with no choice but to stand in fight instead of run and shoot because they will be caught up to by the heavier classes. Not to mention if you turn a corner and see an entire team you’re pretty much fucked because there is no point in running even if you have a huge head start they will catch you and gang bang you.
So you’re faster while wearing 40 pounds of metal then you are without armor on? hmm that makes total sense
He puts a little more effort and energy in running.
The medieval period, like basically any period in history is bad for video game inspiration that is supposed to have rock paper scissor balance.