Not a fan of the combat

[faw]

Some of the devs do read the forum… well at least I do, but I was forum rat long before I joined the studio. And I know about a few other people from the studio who read the forum too.

Awesome! I mean, there is a reason why I backed this project. The studio seems like a very sympathetic group.

I dont really think that the combat would get better by using elemetns from FPS game machanics.
Though it would depend on what exact games you are talking about. But as you meantioned being a competitive FPS player, my thoughts go to CS:GO, Quake, Call of Duty, Battfield, Overwatch and other really competitive games with skillbased mechanics.
And I think that these kind of mechanics do not have a place in our game. Simply because they are incredibly unrealistic.
In those games there is no or little restriction to stamina (which is core mechanic in KCD) and people do incredible jumps and quicksope headshots and other stuff you can think of.
This is something our game should not allow, you cannot be allowed to turn into super hero kind of style killing machine.

I agree about the kinds of gameplay aspects like noscoping, super-heroing, 1s 360s etc. I admit it’s a (potentially) complicated topic, but I’m talking about the control-mechanic aspects of those kinds of games rather than the gameplay those control principles are used for. I’ll try to be a bit more specific. Bear in mind that you probably know all this and I just want to clarify my point, not patronize anyone.

A prerequisite for what could be broadly called competitive games is balance and predictability. You need to be able to predict what happens when I do this sequence of inputs to control my character to a high degree. If it’s random (and not in a bullet-spread kind of way, but maybe because of a high worst-case time lag in the game loop etc) you get frustrated and performance is determined more by luck than skill. You lose the connection to the game. The game needs to feel responsive. That’s what I mean by skill-based, as opposed to games like some RTS games (or “bad” FPS games) where the input can be laggy and the feedback (a sound or a menu animation) doesn’t need to be immediate and consistent. I admit “skill-based” is imprecise, as an RTS can require a lot of skill, just not motor skill. Plenty of people don’t mind that. I would still argue however that an RTS game with a responsive UI “feels” better (and more immersive) than one that isn’t.

Consider Dark Messiah (as it kinda has melee combat and I’ve played it a lot). The movement feels fluid because the animations are timed perfectly and you feel like you’re actually in control of where the point of your sword goes. Your weapon doesn’t have to be a lightsaber or give you god-like powers, but you need to feel in control of it. If you try something, there needs to be feedback, even if you for some reason can’t perform an action (or perform it as well as you could with full stamina). If the buttons that control your avatar’s body suddenly don’t do anything anymore because some animation isn’t quite done yet, you get frustrating combat like in the early Witcher games (and kinda the 3rd). Dishonored also has good responsive movement, though its melee combat isn’t as illustrating. Also, obviously Kingdom Come is aiming a lot higher in complexity in general.

I guess you can also be like the earlier ARMAs and focus on pure realism and then fall more into the class of RTS games where higher level strategy wins the day and immediate control is secondary. That’s completely fine, just a different cup of tea.

I used to play a lot of Red Orchestra 1. It’s not ARMA, but it’s got a focus on realism. Stamina is a really important factor, there’s bullet drop, lots of sway, you name it. It had awesome feeling weapon handling.

I vaguely remember reading some great article on this, the only thing that kinda seems to talk about what I mean after a minute of googling is this:
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/130734/game_feel_the_secret_ingredient.php?print=1

I guess to summarize, I don’t mean to include game mechanics from FPS games (depending on how you define mechanics), but rather the input design philosophy usually involved in successful competitive games.

Realism does not mean awkward gameplay. And we will do everything in our power to not make it awkward.

I guess that’s exactly my main point! Now just to define that weird fuzzy subjective thing people call awkward… I guess what people actually mean (trying not to speak too much for others here) when they say they don’t like the locking mechanic as it is currently, or how it feels non-fluid, is those points mentioned above. Responsiveness, the feeling of control instead of being locked in by having immediate feedback. In a way you could even argue it’s all on a spectrum of Quake3 Arena on one side and turn based strategy games (or even card games) on the other. Maybe there’s a blog entry in this! Or even a scientific study!

Enough rambling! Thanks for reading:)

[theprof739]

I recently got the game, so my first impressions are still pretty clear, so let me throw in my 2 cents. I agree that the combat mouse and keyboard controls need to be better optimized. I had trouble getting the combos to work because it felt like the detection for where my mouse was on the “stickman” was off. so some refinement would be great, but again it’s a in development game so think will change a bunch I’m certain.

On the topic of the locked camera, I should saw as a counterpoint to many others, I absolutely love it. It’s not perfect and some finer control for switching (especially in the Battle of Pribislavitz) would be great. Let me tell you why I love it, I did 3 years of featherweight boxing in college, and so the tutorial ring for swordfighting really hit the mark for me. In boxing, and in most martial arts, your footwork/stance is very important and is often the basics that you learn, thankfully we don’t have to simulate each individual foot movement in video games. Another portion of Boxing that is learning your reach, your range of engagement, and these things become reflexive or muscle memory. The locked on view really handles the feeling of being in a one on one fight very well, so you can keep you eyes on your opponent while you move around and change your distance. Our coach actually used to leave he cellphone volume on in the gym, because when it rings people tend to look around and in the ring, that’s a great way to get clocked in the head. NEVER TAKE YOUR EYES OFF THE OPPONENT! I would imagine if the opponent has a pointed steel bar, that holds doubly true. So The locked in view is great in my opinion, with some tweaking, of course.

In my opinion the combat system in KCD gets high marks; you really have to manage your distance, watch your opponent and how he moves, be aware of your stamina, use different attacks, and use your judgement. there are some things that aren’t perfect, sure, but it’s a video game and it’s still in development. My one complaint is that outside of the training arena, you can kinda “cheese” fights just by hitting and backing up hitting and backing up, but even that is realistic as far as in boxing anyways.

[vonknauss]

couldn’t agree more!. the combat ruins it all along with the no third person view. The only reason I will play this after pledging in kickstarter is because of the visuals. no one with their mind right can say that this combat system is good!. I mean mount and blade is old and outdated but something like that refined would be 1000 times more fun and immersive than this BS.

[Lieste]

The main issue I take with the sword combat of the Beta is that it is Blossfechten - unarmoured combat style, rather than Harnessfechten - other than that it has a far more accurate portrayal of swordsmanship than any other game I’ve seen to date.

There is scope to improve some aspects of the fight, but the overall tone is far more in keeping with the actual recorded techniques and how they are used than the other games used as examples of ‘good sword fighting’. Further, the use of directional blocking is not in keeping with actual behaviour - in reality you almost never block in an incorrect direction (except when flitting or failing and no tactile feedback gets the attacker to a new opening before the defender can recognise the changed opening, the missed parry and correct).

[Ambaryerno]

Further, the use of directional blocking is not in keeping with actual behaviour - in reality you almost never block in an incorrect direction

Furthermore, in reality — particularly the German manuscripts which would have dominated the schools of defense in Bohemia as part of the Holy Roman Empire — you also didn’t “block” the way we think of it from movies and video games. The Germans especially taught that EVERY move should be an attack: If an opponent cuts at you, your response should simultaneously close off his line AND cut him, or at the very least give yourself a line of attack to directly threaten him. There’s very little (not none, but it’s definitely downplayed) dedicated blocking in the German fechtbucher. You do see it more from the Italians, but there’s definitely a cultural trend among the German fencers for a much more aggressive approach (the English seems to offer something of a middle ground, but those sources are unfortunately quite fragmentary so it’s difficult to get a clear sense of how it contrasts and compares the Germans and Italians).

[Lieste]

Hengetort, Krumphau and several parries in Chron, Eisenport, Ochs and Pflug are static parries though often using displacement rather than blocking…
But in general, it is considered more appropriate to cut into your opponent’s attack - it gives a much stronger parry, meeting his momentum in the cut with your own, rather than just attempting to absorb it… The use of lateral movement to permit a single tempo parry and attack is also emphasised although actually accomplishing a successful masterstrike is not guaranteed - and the primary goal of all movements is to avoid being struck, and to deny your opponent the ability to control the tempo and direction of the fight.

Covering your openings is the most important, and this is sometimes most effectively done using the powerful cuts - whether zornhau or unterhau or the zwerchhau, but sometimes done as a parry in pflug or one of the other guards, or running off from hengetort.

The problem with parrying is that is permits your opponent to retain the Vor, leaving you having to defend each attack or be struck. Defending with cuts limits your opponent’s options - he cannot freely attack, but needs to also cover his most exposed openings, and if he makes an error then you seize the initiative back, and perhaps end the fight there and then. Most significantly a missed cut is instantly seen, and a voiding step, or a second cut can be thrown to displace the next threat, while a missed parry cannot be seen as fast, and there is less likelihood of recovering to defend his follow-on attack if he feints.

Once closer in Kreig and out of the zufechts (onset) phase, the use of cuts and parries is minimised, with more work from the bind using geometry, feeling and footwork to give openings for handwork cuts, thrusts, disarms and throws, with an inconclusive pass reverting to the big “clearing” cuts during the withdrawal.

[Ambaryerno]

As I said, there’s exceptions. But there’s definitely a preference for counters that directly attack the opponent IE the schielhau.

[vonknauss]

Yes the witcher 3 is kinda skilless but should never be compared to this game obviously… All tho it has 3rd person view which in my opinion adds to both immersion AND realism since it gives you a somewhat better awareness of the combat situation… 1st person computer games is tunnel sight and doesn’t compensate for the human senses you loose in a game. there’s no split vision and without a locked bascinet or closed helmet the human eyes can pick up movement over 180 degrees. I really would have wanted this to be more like M&B Bannerlord’s combat system but with more realistic impact of the weapon type used and where the hit lands vs armor etc. Also the immersion of being able to see Henry ride around the world in the sunset from a third person perspective will be hugely missed from my side. Speaking of horses, someone mentioned there will be no mounted combat i the first part at least But here we are, Warhorse have taken their road and what are we to do but to accept or shut up haha

[GingerFOX]

someone mentioned there will be no mounted combat i the first part at least

That may change…

[SirWarriant]

I really would have wanted this to be more like M&B Bannerlord’s combat system but with more realistic impact of the weapon type used and where the hit lands vs armor etc.

So you want the combat to turn into a cartoon? Gotcha.

[bloodybrit127]

I 100% understand your gripe with the lock on system, in my opinion it was necessary because otherwise when you want to swing left you also look left and so on however i think it could have been done better perhaps with a lock on button to control it more easily,

that said chivalry isnt at all realistic, cutting peoples heads off through steel plate armor or even cutting through 3 opponents at once is anything but realistic.

perhaps the game for you would be bannerlord when it fanally arives

[Neon_Knight]

Combat look quite good, and it is something nobody ever done before, but is not fun/natural to play. Lets hope they tweak it well. It would be shame, if combat would be weak spot for such an amazing game.

[deadeagle]

i love the combat to its realy nice and realty of it nice to but its hard its difrent and the a lock on one npc wil by nice. but its in alpha so this is yust a thing to show at de end there will change some tings, only thig what you can do is wait for the end game.