PlaneShift
Support => Complaint Department => Topic started by: Caraick on August 22, 2010, 07:00:00 am
-
Well, I've been using the Knives and Daggers skill since I first joined Planeshift on Caraick. I remember the days when it was possible to two-shot ulbernauts with daggers, and it was also possible to take on Maulbernauts, with a bit of dueling skill. Howeverm this is obviously not possible anymore, particularly with the new armor combat system.
That brings me to the main point of my post... Recently, when testing out my daggers on Heavy Armor, I was able to do a whopping .09 damage to someone's foot.... Yes, I typed that correctly, .09 damage. I was using q300 daggers, on q50 HA, in Bloody stance. I had a level of 80 in daggers at the time, and the other player was maxed in Heavy Armor. That was the only time I was ever able to do ANY damage at all. All other hits failed to do any damage on the player. This coming from a pretty high dagger level, and all basic stats maxed. In duels, it is impossible for me to do any damage at all with daggers if someone is maxed in Heavy Armor. That is absolutely ridiculous, and makes very little sense to me. This system seems terribly unfair to dagger fighters, as the players who have maxed Heavy Armor are guaranteed near complete invulnerabilty from daggers and knives.
The daggers being used in the medieval setting that Planeshift is loosely modeled after are not your typical little blades that might be 6 to 8 inches in length, as generally portrayed and/or thought. No, the daggers used in that time period were frequently over a foot long, some times as long as 20 inches, and weighing up to several pounds. That kind of blade would do some serious damage against plate armor, and given it's narrow blade, would be very easy to slip in between plates as well. A dagger of that size would be able to cut through materials and armor just as easily as a sword would. Given that even a shortsword can make considerable damage on plate armor in the new system, why not a dagger of nearly the same size? Take a hit on a helmet, for example.... If a longsword is stabbed directly at a helmet with enough force, the tip of the sword will go right through the helmet, most likely doing the same to the head inside the helmet as well. If a 20 inch dagger blade is stabbed directly at a helmet, in the same manner, with the same amount of force, I guarantee you, the exact same effect will occur, perhaps with even more effect due to the better accuracy of a smaller blade
That's not even counting in the skill that all expert dagger or knife fighters possess... If someone has spent months, even years training in the usage of daggers, you better believe they're pretty darn good at using them against different armor types. Not to mention being maxed in strength, agility, and endurance, the necessary physical requirements would also be there as well. A skilled dagger or knife fighter would be able to find weak points in bulky armor, such as HA plate, as well as be able to stab directly though some areas. Granted, it may be extremely difficult or even impossible to stab directly through a plate mail chestpiece, or a legpiece, but hits on the arms, hands, feet, or head should do more damage then. Maybe work in shoulder hits, where plate mail armor has vulnerable joints? Regardless of how it's done, the system is completely lopsided against dagger fighters' favor..
My main point is this: The damage and effect of daggers in Planeshift currently is terribly skewed, especially with the new armor system. This is unfair to those of us who have spent long hours training daggers, and use them as our primary fighting weapon.
I'm not typically the type to complain, and please don't perceive this as my own enraged ranting, I'm just looking for some answers, or some kind of change... Technically speaking, we're all still just testing the game... Beta, right? :beta:
So please, please, please don't see this as me having a rant at the Devs or the settings team. I have nothing but respect for all the Planeshift team, and I love PS dearly, and trying to help highlight what I think is a problem with a major combat weapon.
Comments, Discussion, Haters, and Feedback Welcome!!!
-
Planeshift daggers have the aesthetic and effect of your average kitchen knife. Historically, medieval daggers ranged anywhere from one-half to two feet in length. In any case, I'm just emphasizing Caraick's good points. My main character wields daggers, and with the armor changes, he has been rendered useless in a fight. Finally returning to the Shift, what I can do is limited because I cant fight like I used to. I would definitely appreciate a change in how daggers are affected in the new armor system.
-
Me thinks ye need to fight people in leather and chainmail ;)
-
That's not a real solution, just the temporary one. ;)
-
What is unfair is not that daggers can't pierce heavy armors, it is that people can run and act swiftly in heavy armor; and can't fall and stay helpless like some turtle, vulnerable to kitchen knives. (Turtle... mmm... yummy!)
With heavy armors only needed in rare occasions, your daggers become useful again.
I think that's how balance is to be reached.
-
if people in heavy armor would be like turtles on their backs, i would BEG the developers to implementing the ability to push people over :)
-
Just asking for balance. 'tis all. Fried turtle'd be nice too.
-
Having read through this, I really agree with Caraick. Medieval daggers were something to be feared, not something that would simply bounce off a set of HA. [Course, I also know from personal experience that Car's daggers do much more damage than 0.09 on someone who doesn't have maxed HA :P ] Seeing how some of the dagger wielders train, and with their ability to move, darting in and out for attacks, it would seem entirely feasible for a high level dagger to penetrate the gaps in armor.
I would also think, that training something like backstab would increase the effectiveness of a rear dagger attack. But it's late, and I'm just rambling thoughts.
-
True, the different weapon and armor classes are poorly balanced at the moment. With unarmed meelee, which is much more expensive to train than any other close range combat skill, the base damage values are even worse than with daggers. However, notice that damage reduction is less of a problem in the more aggressive stances, Caraick. On the other hand, things may get even much worse when qualities of armors and weapons are balanced (given that q300 weapons can perform pretty bad against q50 armor of the same rank).
For the moment, I see three related feature requests/tasks on flypsray:
Pierce damage for daggers (http://www.hydlaaplaza.com/flyspray/index.php?do=details&task_id=93)
Higher impact of armor types on dodges (http://www.hydlaaplaza.com/flyspray/index.php?do=details&task_id=4335)
and most of all
Imbalanced maximum trainable ranks (http://www.hydlaaplaza.com/flyspray/index.php?do=details&task_id=4509)
Also, it could make sense to request a new case in the combat manager (in addition to dodge, block, and hit) for critical hits that ignore the targets damage reduction values.
-
I have to say, I never got the point of an armor skill.
And even less the fact that there are 3 of them; as if there was a skill to mine coal, another to mine iron, etc.
To me, all they do is complicate the balancing.
-
Planeshift daggers have the aesthetic and effect of your average kitchen knife. Historically, medieval daggers ranged anywhere from one-half to two feet in length. In any case, I'm just emphasizing Caraick's good points. My main character wields daggers, and with the armor changes, he has been rendered useless in a fight. Finally returning to the Shift, what I can do is limited because I cant fight like I used to. I would definitely appreciate a change in how daggers are affected in the new armor system.
Thanks for the support, BloodedIrishman, I'm glad I'm not the only one out there seeing this... :)
What is unfair is not that daggers can't pierce heavy armors, it is that people can run and act swiftly in heavy armor; and can't fall and stay helpless like some turtle, vulnerable to kitchen knives. (Turtle... mmm... yummy!)
With heavy armors only needed in rare occasions, your daggers become useful again.
I think that's how balance is to be reached.
I'll agree that there needs to be a balance, but I would disagree that it's fair that daggers can't pierce Heavy Armors at all.... When someone is lower ranked, say more around the 50's, I can still do a decent amount of damage to the player. It seems to beg the question: What is changing when players rank up in armor skill levels? Obviously, if a dagger can do damage to someone on a lower level if hitting the chest, then it seems implied that the dagger is penentrating the plate... The armor quality doesn't change as the person ranks up, although I agreee with Bonifarzia, if/when 300q armor is introduced, things will be terribly unbalanced if they stay this way. My point to this being: If a dagger can inflict damage on someone wearing HA on a lower level, why not on a higher level? The armor itself isn't changing, merely the skill of the person wearing it, but you can have all the skill in the world at wearing HA, it won't stop a 2 foot blade from penentrating your chest plate if it hits.....
True, the different weapon and armor classes are poorly balanced at the moment. With unarmed meelee, which is much more expensive to train than any other close range combat skill, the base damage values are even worse than with daggers. However, notice that damage reduction is less of a problem in the more aggressive stances, Caraick. On the other hand, things may get even much worse when qualities of armors and weapons are balanced (given that q300 weapons can perform pretty bad against q50 armor of the same rank).
For the moment, I see three related feature requests/tasks on flypsray:
Pierce damage for daggers (http://www.hydlaaplaza.com/flyspray/index.php?do=details&task_id=93)
Higher impact of armor types on dodges (http://www.hydlaaplaza.com/flyspray/index.php?do=details&task_id=4335)
and most of all
Imbalanced maximum trainable ranks (http://www.hydlaaplaza.com/flyspray/index.php?do=details&task_id=4509)
Also, it could make sense to request a new case in the combat manager (in addition to dodge, block, and hit) for critical hits that ignore the targets damage reduction values.
To Bonifarzia, Thanks for the links to the flyspray, I'll certainly be reading those, and maybe even posting my own. Pertaining to the more aggressive stances, Boni, I was in bloody during the test I was referring to in the first post, and got the whopping .09 damage, in the most aggressive stance possible.... I had a fair amount of hits, at least a dozen, and that was the only one which was able to do any damage at all. In regards to the new case in the combat manager- Absolutely! I couldn't agree more...and that would bring me to Tessra's post concerning the implementation of backstab, and relating it to critical hits... Again, I couldn't agree more... There needs to be some advantage to wielding daggers besides the slightly quicker timing, which can be equalled by a looted axe or sword... By implementing backstab, or at least some method for a dagger wielder to have a much higher chance at critical hits then a sword fighter, the system could achieve a much greater level of balance. That in addition to making it possible for daggers to penentrate armor at higher levels, see my comments above....
Thanks for all the comments and feedback, keep 'em coming!!
-
I'll agree that there needs to be a balance, but I would disagree that it's fair that daggers can't pierce Heavy Armors at all.... When someone is lower ranked, say more around the 50's, I can still do a decent amount of damage to the player. It seems to beg the question: What is changing when players rank up in armor skill levels? Obviously, if a dagger can do damage to someone on a lower level if hitting the chest, then it seems implied that the dagger is penentrating the plate... The armor quality doesn't change as the person ranks up, although I agreee with Bonifarzia, if/when 300q armor is introduced, things will be terribly unbalanced if they stay this way. My point to this being: If a dagger can inflict damage on someone wearing HA on a lower level, why not on a higher level? The armor itself isn't changing, merely the skill of the person wearing it, but you can have all the skill in the world at wearing HA, it won't stop a 2 foot blade from penentrating your chest plate if it hits.....
Precisely. Nothing is changing physically with the armor, or how it is worn. I suppose some might say that as one's skill with armor increases they might become better able to dodge/avoid strikes, but this would not account for a complete abolishment of hits. More like how agility training can help one to dodge. But even then, it should not completely obscure the fact that a skilled dagger wielder should be able to find the openings anyway.
-
*Caraick huggles the NOMer for agreeing with him, and tells Tessra to check her inbox*
-
:'( I am training in daggers now... guttered for my bad option. When are the developers going to finally get right into the balancing, it obviously isn't right right now so they need to spend about 2 hours sitting there editing it till it seems to be correct. It seems to sound as easy as balancing a medieval weigh scale, it probably isn't. I think the longer dagger types are Galkards, don't know much about those. Are they better than 300Q daggers in combat?
-
I've never even seen a galkard in game.... I dunno.
-
Well, I've been using the Knives and Daggers skill since I first joined Planeshift on Caraick. I remember the days when it was possible to two-shot ulbernauts with daggers, and it was also possible to take on Maulbernauts, with a bit of dueling skill. Howeverm this is obviously not possible anymore, particularly with the new armor combat system.
That brings me to the main point of my post... Recently, when testing out my daggers on Heavy Armor, I was able to do a whopping .09 damage to someone's foot.... Yes, I typed that correctly, .09 damage. I was using q300 daggers, on q50 HA, in Bloody stance. I had a level of 80 in daggers at the time, and the other player was maxed in Heavy Armor. That was the only time I was ever able to do ANY damage at all. All other hits failed to do any damage on the player. This coming from a pretty high dagger level, and all basic stats maxed. In duels, it is impossible for me to do any damage at all with daggers if someone is maxed in Heavy Armor. That is absolutely ridiculous, and makes very little sense to me. This system seems terribly unfair to dagger fighters, as the players who have maxed Heavy Armor are guaranteed near complete invulnerabilty from daggers and knives.
The daggers being used in the medieval setting that Planeshift is loosely modeled after are not your typical little blades that might be 6 to 8 inches in length, as generally portrayed and/or thought. No, the daggers used in that time period were frequently over a foot long, some times as long as 20 inches, and weighing up to several pounds. That kind of blade would do some serious damage against plate armor, and given it's narrow blade, would be very easy to slip in between plates as well. A dagger of that size would be able to cut through materials and armor just as easily as a sword would. Given that even a shortsword can make considerable damage on plate armor in the new system, why not a dagger of nearly the same size? Take a hit on a helmet, for example.... If a longsword is stabbed directly at a helmet with enough force, the tip of the sword will go right through the helmet, most likely doing the same to the head inside the helmet as well. If a 20 inch dagger blade is stabbed directly at a helmet, in the same manner, with the same amount of force, I guarantee you, the exact same effect will occur, perhaps with even more effect due to the better accuracy of a smaller blade
That's not even counting in the skill that all expert dagger or knife fighters possess... If someone has spent months, even years training in the usage of daggers, you better believe they're pretty darn good at using them against different armor types. Not to mention being maxed in strength, agility, and endurance, the necessary physical requirements would also be there as well. A skilled dagger or knife fighter would be able to find weak points in bulky armor, such as HA plate, as well as be able to stab directly though some areas. Granted, it may be extremely difficult or even impossible to stab directly through a plate mail chestpiece, or a legpiece, but hits on the arms, hands, feet, or head should do more damage then. Maybe work in shoulder hits, where plate mail armor has vulnerable joints? Regardless of how it's done, the system is completely lopsided against dagger fighters' favor..
My main point is this: The damage and effect of daggers in Planeshift currently is terribly skewed, especially with the new armor system. This is unfair to those of us who have spent long hours training daggers, and use them as our primary fighting weapon.
I'm not typically the type to complain, and please don't perceive this as my own enraged ranting, I'm just looking for some answers, or some kind of change... Technically speaking, we're all still just testing the game... Beta, right? :beta:
So please, please, please don't see this as me having a rant at the Devs or the settings team. I have nothing but respect for all the Planeshift team, and I love PS dearly, and trying to help highlight what I think is a problem with a major combat weapon.
Comments, Discussion, Haters, and Feedback Welcome!!!
You are right, it isn't very balanced seeing how there are some axes/ swords who have the speed of 1.5, having the descp of kinves and daggers IG as fast but do minimall damage is very wrong.
-
:'( I am training in daggers now... guttered for my bad option. When are the developers going to finally get right into the balancing, it obviously isn't right right now so they need to spend about 2 hours sitting there editing it till it seems to be correct. It seems to sound as easy as balancing a medieval weigh scale, it probably isn't. I think the longer dagger types are Galkards, don't know much about those. Are they better than 300Q daggers in combat?
I've never even seen a galkard in game.... I dunno.
Galkards aren't classified as daggers, they're a type of sword, unless I'm terribly mistaken... :sorcerer:
And as such, due to the much higher effect of swords on Heavy Armor, a 300q galkard would be much better then a 300q dagger, even if the dagger fighter has a much higher skill level. Galkards can only be obtained by a GM event reward, I believe, or by purchasing them from players who have gotten them from an event, which makes them considerably rare...
You are right, it isn't very balanced seeing how there are some axes/ swords who have the speed of 1.5, having the descp of kinves and daggers IG as fast but do minimall damage is very wrong.
This is also another issue I have with knives and daggers in the combat system. Apparently a small battle axe that weighs several pounds of solid metal, and is at least 2 feet long can have the same speed as a 6-10 inch knife that may only weigh a few ounces at most....
-
I've never even seen a galkard in game.... I dunno.
Galkards aren't classified as daggers, they're a type of sword, unless I'm terribly mistaken... :sorcerer:
And as such, due to the much higher effect of swords on Heavy Armor, a 300q galkard would be much better then a 300q dagger, even if the dagger fighter has a much higher skill level. Galkards can only be obtained by a GM event reward, I believe, or by purchasing them from players who have gotten them from an event, which makes them considerably rare...
[/quote]
my galkard is rotting in my storage, oh welll. I think galkards are swords, but i have not checked on mine for a very long time.
-
I've never even seen a galkard in game.... I dunno.
Galkards aren't classified as daggers, they're a type of sword, unless I'm terribly mistaken... :sorcerer:
And as such, due to the much higher effect of swords on Heavy Armor, a 300q galkard would be much better then a 300q dagger, even if the dagger fighter has a much higher skill level. Galkards can only be obtained by a GM event reward, I believe, or by purchasing them from players who have gotten them from an event, which makes them considerably rare...
my galkard is rotting in my storage, oh welll. I think galkards are swords, but i have not checked on mine for a very long time.
[/quote]
1. Galkards are swords meant for fighting underwater.
2. Swords do considerably LESS damage then they used to to heavy armor, so idk wtf your talking about
and 3. Galkards used to be obtainable from dlayo's but they havnt been since labout V 0.5.1
I have a platinum galkard in my storage :) i used to have ornate ones too
-
@Earowo 1- Never knew that, actually, interesting... ;)
2- -EVERYTHING does less damage now, hence my complaints...But swords actually do a bit of damage, whereas daggers will not do -any-... :(
3- They changed that at the .5 release i think, or maybe at 5.1, either way, I was referring to how obtainable they are currently :P
-
swords Do do damage, but they only do about half as much as they used to.. mabey less
and axes are supposedly doing less which is retarted, becuase both swords and axes are slash
i've been training blunt weapon, but so far i cant effect plate mail..
-
Axes are still doing damage on plate mail. *grumbles about people killifying her through her HA* But last night, I was running 50q HA against a falchion/saber, both of over 200q and they did no damage on me at HA 62. When my armor is damaged though, I take damage from the swords.
-
Axes are still doing damage on plate mail. *grumbles about people killifying her through her HA* But last night, I was running 50q HA against a falchion/saber, both of over 200q and they did no damage on me at HA 62. When my armor is damaged though, I take damage from the swords.
Last time i Dueled, it was with julietas, she had i think 300Q swords or something, and i had 300Q axes. I think she was on normal stance and i was on bloody. She did like 100 damage to me, or even more. But i was only doing like 50 -100 damge. Also we had 50q HA.
Also one time with Troyyer he is only in full defenive (50q HA), i was in bloody stance (300Q axe) and i only did like .30 damage so the duel lasteed around 30 minutes.
So I decided the Armor system went down south to crap, so when we dueled again we didnt have armor. Which would be fair to everyone except if Krans participate.
-
Well, if you're in bloody with the same quality weapons, she would do more damage than you. It balances out the difference between axes/swords. Full defensive is even worse about not being able to inflict damage, either on the other person or them on you.
But if I fight someone who has double my axe level or higher, no matter what stance I do, they are going to do some damage. Whereas, the same stance, same level of dagger will do almost no damage.
If I'm dueling for fun or training, I prefer armorless. It makes it more fair, and more fun. But if I'm in a fight or being attacked, then you're darn right I'm going to have 50q HA on.
-
Dagger as a feared weapon..? Guys, do you all come from 1960s South Bronx or something? Where do you even take your theories from?
Daggers were never considered to be decent battlefield weapons.
I do realise that you probably can think of countless ways in which a guy with a pointy stick can overwhelm a fully clad axeman, but imagine... for a second just imagine this: not everyone is a freaking ninja...
-
Dagger as a feared weapon..? Guys, do you all come from 1960s South Bronx or something? Where do you even take your theories from?
Daggers were never considered to be decent battlefield weapons.
I do realise that you probably can think of countless ways in which a guy with a pointy stick can overwhelm a fully clad axeman, but imagine... for a second just imagine this: not everyone is a freaking ninja...
I personally think that a skill-dependent bonus to Pierce damage would make sense here. That way, skilled dagger wielders such as Caraick, Kaerli, and Daehaz can out-ninja the plate wearers, while they still are safe from more pedestrian opponents (which takes Draklar's comment into account).
Remember this, Draklar: if it hurts, it works!
-
Daggers were carried by all classes of soldiers specifically for their ability to pierce chain and plate mail armor in close quarters. This is well known.
-
Daggers were carried by soldiers, but rarely as combat weaponry (and never as primary weapon). Their basic uses were ornamentation, out-of-battle defense or simply a mean of suicide.
Gladius and Xiphos is pretty much as short as standard bladed weaponry gets, and neither of these shortswords were ever used as primary weapons. And that's shortswords. With a dagger it's nearly impossible to even pass a shield (unless you're a kaerli), and I hope we're also talking about opponents who were actually trained to use their (more sensible) weapons to keep their enemies at proper range, possess the ability to (magically enough) move around, dash people and, I don't know, hit stuff. People always had better means of piercing armour. Most notably a spear. Later other forms of armour-piercing weaponry were invented.
And adding to this, for some unknown reason it's actually pretty hard to find an RPG system where a dagger-wielder can match a similarily trained swordsman. Actually, it's pretty much the case in most systems that a heavy-armoured warrior wielding a sword or a mace can outmatch any other class in a one-on-one combat. Perhaps it's because the silly game producers perceive warriors as a sheer fighting force. I dunno why.
So both reality and game industry are actually against this bizarre idea of dagger-wielding superheroes cutting through the universe's few remaining shreds of common sense.
But yeah, ninja.
P.S. ninja were assassins, not warriors. In open combat they would be beaten by samurai, hard. And also by pirates.
P.P.S. in open combat ninja used primarily katana. A sword. Not a dagger.
-
Keep in mind too, that not all "battles" took place on a battlefield. Many times daggers were used as a sneak attack, in dark alleys, ports, taverns, etc.
For example... a "knight" has gone to his local tavern and happens to be relaxing with a pint or twenty. Some nefarious person comes up behind him and notices a fat purse and decides to take it. They probably aren't going to pull out their giant battle axe and give a war cry to alert the poor stupid knight and everyone else in the tavern. No, they are going to pretend to be drunk, stumble over, shank him in the side with his dagger of doom, piercing the armor he most likely didn't take off, and steal the purse, before stumbling out the door. No one being the wiser of what he did until they find the knight's bleeding body at closing time.
Now, let's say Mr. Nefarious doesn't kill the knight... If the knight gets up and starts chasing the thief, does it make sense for the thief to not be able to defend himself atall? No. He would have skills, and would be deadly with his daggers. Otherwise he would have chosen another line of work.
And yes, soldiers did carry daggers... as secondary weapons. No one ever charged into battle holding their bright, shiny (read that as tiny compared to a claymore) dagger aloft. No, you kept it in a boot, or a sheath in case your primary weapon was lost, damaged, or you were too injured to lift it.
P.S. Depends on the years of training for both the ninja and the samurai.
P.S.S. Ninja were trained in the use of many weapons, quite a few being very effective on a long range distance which a samurai could not compensate for. Don't forget shuriken and the like. Katana and wakazashi were not ideal weapons for ninja, as they generally involved being close or visible.
P.S.S. Honestly, the style of combat seen in Eastern cultures is so different than that of Western cultures that its hard to compare them. Huge cumbersome weapons, versus light, fast ones. Even the smallest true double-edged sword lacks the precise handling of a katana. But, this also takes into consideration the overall musculature and stature of those wielding them.
-
this bizarre idea of dagger-wielding superheroes cutting through the universe's few remaining shreds of common sense
I'm not sure where you get your exhaustive and precise knowledge of weaponry, but its hardly a subject for such narcissistic drama.
With the advent of very protective plate armour during the Middle Ages, the dagger became increasingly useful as a good close in weapon for stabbing through the gaps in armour. Books offering instruction on the use of weapons predominantly described that the dagger be held in the hand with the blade pointing from the heel of the hand both in armour and out of armour, and used by making downward jabs.
From the year 1250 onward, gravestones and other contemporary images show knights with a dagger or combat knife at their side.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagger
Swords supposedly owe their existence to daggers. In the arms-race of ancient history, daggers allegedly became longer and longer until they became in all respects, swords. When swords took over the dominant role in combat, daggers were still kept around for several reasons; they were great for close quarters fighting, they could be hidden easily and, if weighted properly, could be thrown at opponents. Daggers were also still quite popular in the dining halls to cut and skewer food as well (seriously).
http://www.strongblade.com/prod/sba-liegeblade_hist.html
-
I may be repeating myself, but the real advantage of a dagger over plate armor is that you can wear the dagger at all times.
A knight in plate armor stopping by a tavern? That happens in cartoons.
And yes, you can kill the plated guy with a dagger: When he is fallen helpless and you can insert into and shake the joints and penetrate with some level of freedom.
-
I'm not sure where you get your exhaustive and precise knowledge of weaponry, but its hardly a subject for such narcissistic drama.
Which part are you asking about exactly? Purpose of Xiphos may be taken from The Spartans (not 300, of course), rejection of the idea that you can effectively use a dagger against a shielded opponent may be taken from observation of actual duels, rejection of the idea that you can out-manouver an opponent wearing plate armour may be taken from wearing that thing or seeing experienced infantry in action - unlike what this thread appears to claim, they're damn fast.
Bottom line is, plated warrior is greater challenge for a dagger than un-plated one. Slow plate is a myth, and yes, that's a well known fact. If the dagger wasn't treated as a super-effective weapon before plate, then it couldn't be considered as one in the plate era. A dagger would be used only if you lost your other weapons or if your other weapons proved ineffective. That's where your quotes come in. None of this actually proves superiority of dagger over plate armour.
Tuck was about as effective against plate as longsword was against mail. And I doubt anyone in his right mind will claim that dagger was as effective battlefield weapon as tuck.
@Tessra: I believe there's a legend of a samurai that used thrown knife against master of Kusarigama (very effective against swords) to weaken his opponent and used his sword only after wounded, the guy couldn't use Kusarigama anymore. So distance isn't really their disadvantage as they used a big variety of weapons, including longbows and shortbows.
And yes, I only talk about open combat. Dagger can be hidden more easily so it's better for surprise attacks. Also no one in his right mind would use a long weapon indoors or any place with little space - that's why I said daggers were used for out-of-battle defense. But in such scenario daggers were superior to most any type of equipment and it's not about out-manouvering just plate.
@khoridor: agreed.
-
Slow plate is a myth, and yes, that's a well known fact.
As it is now, a person wearing full plate (helmet, chest, legs, arms, boots, gloves) can run at full speeds, keeping up with someone garbed in some ragged trousers.
Draklar is correct in his statement:
Bottom line is, plated warrior is greater challenge for a dagger than un-plated one.
However, someone who wears plate should not only have their mobility reduced but their ability to dodge and counter blows effectively.
And why, tell me, are other classes of weaponry allowed enchantments which lower their delay significantly, yet dagger can only be lowered to 1.35 from its original 1.5? It's my opinion that Daggers & Knives ought to be the fastest range of attacking weapons, but they can be matched in speed and overwhelmingly beaten in possible damage.
I would like to see some balance between armor-weapon realism and letting dagger characters have their fun.
-
The goofiest part of this is that daggers IG do Slash damage, not Pierce, which doesn't exactly make that much sense...although can't we all admit that the combat system needs a thorough rework?
Or:
- Swords do Slash (and in the case of claymores, Blunt) damage at the moment. They should really do all three damage types in various proportions (either mostly slash for say a sabre or falchion, mostly pierce for say a rapier, or a fairly even mix of the two for say a longsword; heavier blades would get more blunt damage then lighter ones (but it'd still be minor compared to the blade's Slash or Pierce stats)
- Knives and Daggers always do Slash damage. This is a holdover from when Pierce was not implemented. Again, they should do a variable mixture of Slash and Pierce damage to account for the fact many of them can be used both for cutting and stabbing/thrusting (unless you are dealing with a weapon that is thrusting-only, which would do only Pierce damage)
- Axes do Slash damage as well. They should be able to do Blunt damage too (I don't see how someone would NOT be in pain after being hit with the side of an axe).
- Mace & Hammer is fine in all aspects (these weapons do Blunt damage en masse, obviously) with one exception: quarterstaves should be under Polearm due to their length and the fact they are held at the center, not at the end
- Polearm isn't fleshed out yet (quarterstaves SHOULD be considered polearms if they aren't already), but when further developments are put together, staves should be all Blunt damage while spears and the like are mixtures of Slash, Pierce, and Blunt (simply turn the spear around or use the flat of its blade to get Blunt damage).
- Ranged right now covers bows. These do Pierce damage exclusively. Throwing weapons are a different can of worms all together: I guess they'd do Pierce as well, but you'd need some sort of modifier to account for the point's impact angle to the target (which very often is not 90deg, due to the fact knives and stars have spin on them when thrown; darts on the other hand do not need such a modifier, whether thrown or shot from a blowpipe)
- Melee, finally, can simply do Blunt damage (or can it? Should we take into account moves beyond the obvious kicks and punches, such as joint manipulations of various and sundry varieties?)
Also, if we do decide on a minimal speed penalty for heavier armors, couldn't we use a stamina penalty instead?
-
I like that summary. Just one complaint.
Enkis fighting melee should do slash&pierce damage ;)
-
[I'm just gonna address these in your list, as you wrote them out so well. kaerli2!]
- Swords do Slash (and in the case of claymores, Blunt) damage at the moment. They should really do all three damage types in various proportions (either mostly slash for say a sabre or falchion, mostly pierce for say a rapier, or a fairly even mix of the two for say a longsword; heavier blades would get more blunt damage then lighter ones (but it'd still be minor compared to the blade's Slash or Pierce stats)
So true. Obviously one can turn a blade to the side, and smack with the flat of it, or even with the hilt to do a blunt damage, but as a rule, they would be a slashing damage.
- Knives and Daggers always do Slash damage. This is a holdover from when Pierce was not implemented. Again, they should do a variable mixture of Slash and Pierce damage to account for the fact many of them can be used both for cutting and stabbing/thrusting (unless you are dealing with a weapon that is thrusting-only, which would do only Pierce damage)
Even on the best thrust, the victim of the thrust usually twists in their effort to pull away. I do some knife fighting IRL, and it's hard to do a pierce only damage unless it's a sneak attack.
- Axes do Slash damage as well. They should be able to do Blunt damage too (I don't see how someone would NOT be in pain after being hit with the side of an axe).
Yeah... just ow.
- Mace & Hammer is fine in all aspects (these weapons do Blunt damage en masse, obviously) with one exception: quarterstaves should be under Polearm due to their length and the fact they are held at the center, not at the end
Keep in mind, things like morning stars have points, and should be able to deal at least some pierce/slash damage. I would think a crushing blow to the head would have some amount of pierce, while a swing across the body would drag the points through the person, causing a slash damage as well as blunt.
- Polearm isn't fleshed out yet (quarterstaves SHOULD be considered polearms if they aren't already), but when further developments are put together, staves should be all Blunt damage while spears and the like are mixtures of Slash, Pierce, and Blunt (simply turn the spear around or use the flat of its blade to get Blunt damage).
I would love to see these fleshed out in game. I have a halbred that I fight with IRL, and it's a lot of fun, as well as a lot of work to be able to manipulate the type of attack delivered.
- Ranged right now covers bows. These do Pierce damage exclusively. Throwing weapons are a different can of worms all together: I guess they'd do Pierce as well, but you'd need some sort of modifier to account for the point's impact angle to the target (which very often is not 90deg, due to the fact knives and stars have spin on them when thrown; darts on the other hand do not need such a modifier, whether thrown or shot from a blowpipe)
I'd like to see a thrown weapon skill. Something that the distance you can accurately inflict damage on grows as skill level increases.
- Melee, finally, can simply do Blunt damage (or can it? Should we take into account moves beyond the obvious kicks and punches, such as joint manipulations of various and sundry varieties?)
And like Minks says, Enki and Klyros should be able to do slashing damage, just by virtue of having claws.
-
The goofiest part of this is that daggers IG do Slash damage, not Pierce, which doesn't exactly make that much sense...although can't we all admit that the combat system needs a thorough rework?
We could admit, as in any system will always be too this for some and too that for others.
Take my personal opinion for example: To separate Slash and Pierce is a bad (D&D) idea in the first place. A weapon that can do one can do both, depending on how one uses it, what the target is, etc. Just that can lead to endless arguing. Then, there is slashing and slashing; e.g., try chopping down a tree with a sword... Just to say that what makes a weapon has more to do with how to handle it than with how sharp it is. Then 2 categories would be enough: Breaking and Bleeding damage. Just an opinion that I would suggest IF a rework was needed.
Anyway, forget realism, because:
1) it's not achievable
2) it's not what people want (nobody survives 10 consecutives axe blows to the head IRL)
3) while not achieved, it's yet too complicated
What brings diversity in combat is not one parameter, but a series of advantages/disadvantages that do not necessarily enter into the hit/damage equations. In a balanced world, the simplest ones include weight, price, durability, etc. If balancing was all about playing with damage values, it would be boring. Instead, what may be done is choose which (yes, only some of them) advantages of daggers to put IG. They can be based on real world, on movies, whatever, it doesn't matter, because they are chosen for a purpose; pretty much anything can be justified.
So, what I suggest is to make a list of reasons why daggers would be selected as a weapon/skill, regardless of the damage they may or may not do on some type of armors. Starting with:
- Light
- Legal to draw
- Throwable
- Usable in small space, in a crowd
- ?
Then perhaps some ideas will be worth being added to the game...
-
Where are people getting this whole "you can't use daggers against shields" business? I've done it before, I tended to use short swords and daggers, and if your smart/quick its quite easy to get a dagger around a shield with enough force to make your opponent drop something O.o (well what would be enough force if we were stupid enough to be using sharpened weapons). Although if you were outnumbered, you would be screwed, and it is generally a rather risky thing to attempt.
anyway, to be honest i think daggers should be one of the only offhand weapons to be honest, i've always found the idea of someone running around wielding duel long swords rather...stupid, it'd be pretty unwieldy and the guy with one sword would most likely be able to get through your guard, I'm sure its perfectly possible, but with long weapons like swords (short sword being an exception I suppose) it seems somewhat pointless to me, a sword and a dagger, thats a good combination, use one for parry and when your opponent gets close shove the dagger into their neck ect. but 'eh... thats just what I reckon.
-
Where are people getting this whole "you can't use daggers against shields" business? I've done it before, I tended to use short swords and daggers, and if your smart/quick its quite easy to get a dagger around a shield with enough force to make your opponent drop something O.o (well what would be enough force if we were stupid enough to be using sharpened weapons). Although if you were outnumbered, you would be screwed, and it is generally a rather risky thing to attempt.
anyway, to be honest i think daggers should be one of the only offhand weapons to be honest, i've always found the idea of someone running around wielding duel long swords rather...stupid, it'd be pretty unwieldy and the guy with one sword would most likely be able to get through your guard, I'm sure its perfectly possible, but with long weapons like swords (short sword being an exception I suppose) it seems somewhat pointless to me, a sword and a dagger, thats a good combination, use one for parry and when your opponent gets close shove the dagger into their neck ect. but 'eh... thats just what I reckon.
You can simply jam their shield-arm to the outside, which forces them to use their feet...if you have them pinned to a wall when you do that, you can get quick strikes in that way.
BTW: try imagining a "box" in front of the enemy's (or your) torso. You want to keep your hands/arms inside that box, so that you can strike or parry. Also, whoever has their arms inside the opponent's has the advantage, as they can basically control the fight that way.
-
you could institute minimum damages ??? there is a difference between blocked and hit with failed damage. it would be as simple as if DR > damage dealt than use minimum damage (1 to 2 hp) but if you do successfully hit someone you should always do at least a small ammount of damage.
-
ok, having read most of the posts and links till here... i can't imagine a dagger weilder taking on a full plated warrior on a frontal attack. He should be ready to get butchered not because of the plate's protection as for the opponent's sword's length. Using daggers to block swords and figh on par with them sounds hard too... though, if two fighters are pretty close the one that has a dagger is in advantage... shields can't be used and there is little space for movements... if the combat system should be realistic then the most important thing would be the impact of a weapon affecting the opponent's movemet at least. Like making them stop for a short moment... thust there would be a meanining in someone approaching and hitting with daggers. But since PS is still on :beta: i won't be surprised to see a bit different fighting system after a few years :)
If the fighting system is reworked then how about changing to a secondary weapon as bow or daggers by pressing a certain key? (just as we press shift to run)
-
ok, having read most of the posts and links till here... i can't imagine a dagger weilder taking on a full plated warrior on a frontal attack. He should be ready to get butchered not because of the plate's protection as for the opponent's sword's length. Using daggers to block swords and figh on par with them sounds hard too... though, if two fighters are pretty close the one that has a dagger is in advantage... shields can't be used and there is little space for movements... if the combat system should be realistic then the most important thing would be the impact of a weapon affecting the opponent's movemet at least. Like making them stop for a short moment... thust there would be a meanining in someone approaching and hitting with daggers. But since PS is still on :beta: i won't be surprised to see a bit different fighting system after a few years :)
If the fighting system is reworked then how about changing to a secondary weapon as bow or daggers by pressing a certain key? (just as we press shift to run)
I have to agree that I do not see someone skilled with daggers taking on a full plated warrior on a frontal attack, I think that is rather the point actually. A dagger user would try a sneak attack from behind, or if confronted try and move around the warrior trying to stay out of axe/sword range and dash in and try to strike at weak points in the armor when possible (Or something of the sort), which would most certainly do at least some damage if it hit, especially since weak points are often along joints.
However there is currently no speed or agility disadvantage to wearing full plate during combat and thus wearing lighter armor has no real advantage either. Shouldn't someone wearing light armor and using daggers at least be able to dodge a lot more blows than someone wearing plate and wielding heavy axes? I agree that if the axe user gets a hit in the dagger user is probably doomed, but a dagger user should at least be able to have chance at wearing the opponent down.
If you want to go for full realism then yes, a fully plated warrior with axes/swords would most likely own a dagger user on the battle field, but -off- the battle field the heavy armor gets put away if not the weapons as well, while the daggers can be carried around permanently. Yet I doubt that level of realism will be reached in game unless a time limit or some other penalty to wearing heavy armor is put in place, since when playing I see far more people wearing heavy armor as a permanent attire than those that actually take it off when they are not fighting.
So yes trying to stick with realism is nice but the game mechanics are limiting and thus it is not always fully possible.
My point is a dagger user should at least have -some- chance of defending themselves or doing some damage before they get taken down. As things are currently there is basically no point in even making the attempt.
-
My point is a dagger user should at least have -some- chance of defending themselves or doing some damage before they get taken down. As things are currently there is basically no point in even making the attempt.
/me applauds happily
Right now, it is completely -impossible- for dagger fighters to combat ANYONE wearing HA. In normal stance, a HA fighter can sit down and watch as a maxed dagger fighter hits them endlessly, with absolutely no damage in return. There is NO balance in the system right now in terms of HA versus LA and daggers. There needs to at least be some balance, as Kiraki says.
-
@Caraick :thumbup:
-
Swords were pretty useless against plate armor. Plate armor brought about a switch to blunt weapons, because pretty much all piercing and slashing weapons were rendered close enough to useless not to be worth it. Daggers still had a use, though. While no knight would charge into battle with knife extended, in the event combat turned to grappling, or in the event a plated warrior was taken off his feet, it was the dagger that was best suited to administering a death blow - but then, only once the opponent was fully subdued and pinned. If daggers need to be a waste of time leveling, so should swords and bows. Really, the only weapons that should be remarkably effective should be hammers, maces and the like. That's the realism if realism is the goal - not sure it should be.
If realism is the goal, and nigh invulnerable plate armor users (and they were neigh invulnerable until the advent of firearms), plate armor users should risk collapse from overheating if they don't take breaks from wearing the armor, and particularly if they fight in it for extended periods. The idea that plate armor rendered one immobile is largely a fallacy. Not a total fallacy - tournament jousting armor was indeed so specialized and heavy in some cases, that one did need help to mount a horse for example, but show arms and practical arms were two different things - same with sword weight. I have a replica zweihander from renaissance Landeskenechts and it weighs a good 15 pounds. Parade swords could sometimes get so unweildy, but combat swords never did.
So anyway, Real plate armor should be largely invulnerable to bladed weapons, reasonably vulnerable to blunt weapons, and the user should face penalties to endurance - passing out or worse, if he fights extended periods in any sort of warm weather. One idea about plate armor that isn't a fallacy is that the stuff was a microwave. Thick padding, heat conductive metal - it was a serious problem.
EDIT: In summary, if realism is the key, the tradeoff for practical invulnerability in combat to swords, daggers and the like should be my seeing random heavy armor wearers passed out here and there if they wear their armor everywhere they go, and passing out from protracted combat. To further the realism, the dagger users aught be able to take the opportunity to administer a near 100% chance death blow into a gap in the armor, such as the visor. THAT was the dagger's raison d'etre, and if its weaknesses are being fully recognized, so too should its strengths. Fair is fair.
-
The weapon system really needs a fix. After reading this, I think training my new char with daggers would be stupid. I also agree that HA should have a penalty for wearing, and also maybe a amount of time needed to put it on or take it off
-
HA should be open for piercing damage, such as from a dagger.
-
HA should be open for piercing damage, such as from a dagger.
:thumbup:
There ya go ;D but in the current system, K/D are still slash weapons only... >:(
-
HA should be open for piercing damage, such as from a dagger.
That could work, but to make it more realistic, the damage needs to be all or nothing. The attacker either slips in the cracks, or deflects off harmlessly. If the attack gets through, it should be as if the heavy armor wasn't there. If it doesn't get through, then it should be like there was no attack. Contrast this to blunt weapon damage, where even if the attack doesn't really pass the armor, it still does partial damage. Accuracy should be everything for a piercing attack. Strength should be the biggest factor in a blunt attack. Slashing weapons should be a hybrid of both.
-
the damage needs to be all or nothing. The attacker either slips in the cracks, or deflects off harmlessly.
Yes, exactly.
-
*Shameless resurrection of topic*
I'm looking forward to seeing how the GSoC developers' work influences the effect of daggers and knives, with new combat cases and such. Seeing how the new maximum levels, while helping some, have not been sufficient alone to make daggers a viable weapon against any armor aside plate, regardless of skill level in the weapon.
-
I fully support all of the problems mentioned above.
What I'd really like to see are different kind of daggers. There are so many different kind of swords that are different in the damage they do. With the daggers you don't have any choice at all.
I never tried to use knives, as they're even worse than daggers.
-
*Shameless resurrection of topic*
I think that's justified here and now.
Especially with respect to this:
Special Effects
- the idea here is to make some attacks have less power but have a chance at a special effect that will affect the outcome of a battle
- ...
- ignore a percentage of armor
I think above is the most important point for daggers.
Considering that dual wielding may and will be implemented in some way,
I would guess that a light weapon class will certainly benefit from this as well.
-
I think that's justified here and now.
Especially with respect to this:
Special Effects
- the idea here is to make some attacks have less power but have a chance at a special effect that will affect the outcome of a battle
- ...
- ignore a percentage of armor
I think above is the most important point for daggers.
Considering that dual wielding may and will be implemented in some way,
I would guess that a light weapon class will certainly benefit from this as well.
If I read through the combat enhancement goals correctly, I'm hoping that light weapons, in particularly knives, or daggers, are given a chance for critical damage, or other similar weapon classes, like Ranged, or perhaps hammers. Either way, I'm really excited to seeing how the enhancement is going to affect the damages of K/D.
With regards to what Gillis said: You're absolutely correct. The only practical use currently for knives is as a shiny, sharp paperweight. They've got the exact same delay as daggers, with no benefits besides a much lower slash ratio ;) But, I'm trusting that this problem will be fixed sometime in the future, as recently, we continue to see new types of swords, axes, maces, and bows with slash and delay that are affected by their names and buff. Seeing as how every single other class has got varied slash and damage ratio, I'm hoping that dagger and knives will altered sometime soon™. [/list]
-
... recently, we continue to see new types of swords, axes, maces, and bows with slash and delay that are affected by their names and buff. Seeing as how every single other class has got varied slash and damage ratio, I'm hoping that dagger and knives will altered sometime soon™. [/list]
My feeling is that even with the current combat system, there are other relevant weapon stats than slash(/blunt) and delay values, even though those are all we players can actually see. Chances to block or avoid getting blocked are certainly very important, and ranges should be an essential weapon property.
Now I wonder if the hard limit of delay 1.5 is still needed, because it leaves less space for those knives and daggers to have their stats improved by "loot" modifiers. Anyways, with the "combat enhancements", such effects might get much less important.
-
the problem of the damage daggers does is not due to the damage it does itself, but to the fact that HA is unbalanced....
The armor system needs rebalancing, all weapons work like they should work
-
When working on rebalancing armors just changing some values wont solve the underlying problems though. It could serve as a quick dirty fix for better gameplay experience but there should be a bigger redesign in the future such as eg. +Dodge for LA or reduced Attackspeed for HA etc..
-
Yeah... I'm going to have to agree with Perlam on this one. Maybe Daggers are under-powered, but right now HA is a bigger problem.
-
My feeling is that even with the current combat system, there are other relevant weapon stats than slash(/blunt) and delay values, even though those are all we players can actually see. Chances to block or avoid getting blocked are certainly very important, and ranges should be an essential weapon property.
Now I wonder if the hard limit of delay 1.5 is still needed, because it leaves less space for those knives and daggers to have their stats improved by "loot" modifiers. Anyways, with the "combat enhancements", such effects might get much less important.
I think I can agree with you there, and again agree on the point that with the new "enhancements", such effects might be made less relevant.
the problem of the damage daggers does is not due to the damage it does itself, but to the fact that HA is unbalanced....
The armor system needs rebalancing, all weapons work like they should work
Here, I think I can agree with you half-way, Perlam and Mekora, you're absolutely right that currently HA is strongly overbalanced. If you're not wearing HA, you're in trouble if you're fighting someone who is. However, there's a couple changes that I'd still like to see to the K/D weapon class, and also a few others. Most notably, I'd like to see daggers changed to a pierce damage, and have the pierce value be substantially higher than 1.5. The settings team did a nice job with setting resistances of various armors to different types of damages, and I think that if the pierce resistance value on HA could be set slightly lower, which would allow for weapons like daggers and ranged to have a greater, more realistic effect. Though again, I'd like to re-iterate where I agree strongly with Bonifarzia here: I'm really looking forward to the combat enhancements, and their effect on light weapons classes.
When working on rebalancing armors just changing some values wont solve the underlying problems though. It could serve as a quick dirty fix for better gameplay experience but there should be a bigger redesign in the future such as eg. +Dodge for LA or reduced Attackspeed for HA etc..
I think either of those are fine ideas to help balance light weapons and armor, I've suggested something similar in my post on the combat system, somewhere around here :P Perhaps something akin to this will pop up when we see the combat enhancements. However, I agree with you 100%, I'd love to see some detrimental effects to wearing HA, and perhaps some small perks of wearing LA: Quicker movements, easier dodging, etc. :thumbup: