@RushSecond:
We’ll have to agree to disagree on the topic of miss punishment. I’ve personally found CFTP harder to punish than panic parries, and it seems like TB’s policy is that more punishment for misses is better. Besides, having a major part of the punishment being stamina costs seems like the most annoying type of punishment you can get. Are you sure you want to return to fighting against that yellow bar instead of that red one?
Fighting an enemies yellow bar is different from my own yellow bar being the means through which I am punished for overusing a mechanic, the former being mleh and the latter being not only acceptable but desired.
I agree with the former completely and the latter somewhat. Unless your weapon is unusually fast, going to recovery as a “fakeout” tactic seems strictly worse than a combo-drag or combo-feint, and usually just gives your opponent a chance to get back in the fight.
I did overstate when I said that going to recovery was never useful; all along I really just mean it’s less useful than a combo.
I think this goes back to our initial disagreement on the importance of stamina. If we value stamina differently, then we’re going to have different opinions. My experience is particularly biased towards competitive play since that’s what I’ve played/watched the most of. Though I still feel stam is a substantial component in 1v1’s, I feel that its importance is made more explicit in competitive team settings.
I have not found this to be true. Even in DW I have found that my highest chances of hitting is when I’ve already hit someone (which cancels their sprint temporarily), and then combo into them. It might be harder to combo-hit than in CMW, but that’s not an important comparison; the important comparison is whether post-hit combos are easier to hit than single strikes, and in both games it is, so if you just single strike over and over, each one is more likely to miss.
Right now the current state of DW is a difficult to use barometer. Against newer folks I’d agree that successive combo hits are easier to hit than single strikes, but vs people that know how to use footwork and mobility, particularly on faster classes, I notice a substantial difference and often times prefer not to combo so that I don’t get my horizontal turn speed capped.
That is an entirely intuitive technique. It’s obvious that sprint+w+jump+kick will do all of those. It’s also less annoying if the inputs are wrong because even if you miss a command like sprint or jump, the kick still goes off, unlike CFTP which breaks completely if you miss something.
It seems equally intuitive to me that combo + feint + parry would result in someone canceling a combo’d swing and parrying. Incorrect input in both strings result in a situation that 1) punishes stam, 2) leaves one open to damage. The difference being a flying kick is usually used as an offensive manuever that you’re now being punished for inputting incorrectly, whereas CftP is defensive and, if you’re using CftP correctly, you had to place yourself in a position to have to parry in the first place so I feel less unfairly punished.
Feint windows/unfeintable releases- .001s is the difference between a perfect feint and absolutely no feint at all, which happens quite a bit especially with unfamiliar/fast weapons.
The feint windows didn’t change this behavior; it just brought it 0.2 seconds earlier. Before feint windows, the cutoff point was at the end of windup/beginning of release, and that was the difference between a perfect feint and no feint.
Which is precisely why I included “unfeintable releases” (which was basically the start of the unfeintable portion of the strike pre-feint windows) so as to try to avoid that confusion :P. My interest wasn’t in how you felt about the .2s window at the end of each windup. Rather, specifically how you feel about an incorrectly timed input being the difference between a perfect feint and absolutely no feint at all
This should be fixed. I had said so during the beta patch that it was accidentally introduced.
This is consistent and I’m glad you responded this way so that I didn’t waste text addressing it.
Daggers blocking mauls- challenge to intuitive combat immersion
The problem with this one is that it’s difficult to draw the line somewhere. If daggers can’t block mauls, then what about short swords and the cudgel? If they can’t, what about MAA primaries? No matter what you do with this, it’s always going to seem weird that one weapon can block it but another can’t, so it’s just simplest and fairest if every weapon can block every other weapon.
Lines can be quite easily drawn. 1h’s vs 2h’s (like they did for flinch timers), a blocking strength thresh-hold (all weapons already have blocking strengths, so to set a threshold for weapons with a property like “crush” or something would be entirely intuitive and precedented), or even just attributed “crush” to a certain class of weapons to make them do some damage through parries and balance the weapon stats accordingly like they’ve done in other games.
These would be notoriously difficult to do though while keeping a consistent feel to chivalry across multiple weapons, so the question is: Do you value consistency of chiv combat over a desire for immersion in chiv combat. I think the answer most gamers would give you and the answer that Chivalry demands is the former rather than the latter (in fact, Andrew/TBS-Ghost said, “Gameplay balance has always been the goal. We are more worried about the game being fun than realistic.”).
So in light of these responses, I’d argue that:
The inputs for CftP are no less counter-intuitive than other input strings (In fact, each input does exactly what it does under normal circumstances: the feint input feints, etc.), and there is perhaps even more incentive for punishing a missed input here than other strings of moves in which incorrect inputs screw you even more (an incorrect input in a flying kick fucks you even if you had the initiative, while CftP is only something that you’d ideally attempt when you’ve placed yourself in a position where you’ve granted your opponent initiative).
I still would like to hear what you think about whether resctricting timing of inputs of other mechanics in such a hardlined contrast between perfect execution and absolute failed execution (no-feint barriers for example) is applicable in the same way that a failed CftP timing can make the difference between a good CftP and failed CftP.
The case can be made that there are already things in the game that detract from immersion so it is safe to say that immersion isn’t a chief goal. Your response is that in those instances TBS dun fucked up and needs to do something about it, which is pretty free of inconsistency.
I’d argue that TBS and most players, even if they do value immersive combat to some degree, value consistent and fun combat even more. The fact that you find a short input string jarring from your immersion should feel no more jarring than the fact that you can parry a giant maul with a tiny dagger or that you can’t hold a block with a weapon by machine-gun parrying or just plain holding. Or the fact that you wanted to drag your swing that extra little bit but the horizontal turn speed cap wouldn’t let you. Immersion is an end of combat, but it is not the final end (in fact, it can also be seen as a product of that final end): fun combat is.
Given the rough nature of the combat in general (all the mostly NECESSARY artificial, desyncs, wonky tracers, etc.), immersion is already constantly suspended for folks that actually pay attention to the mechanics. To include an appeal to a state that is in constant suspension is a pretty hollow appeal.
