Killing each other at the same time.



  • Hello,

    I bought this game on the Steam weekend-sale and I must say: it was really worth it. Fantastic game! I’ve played it for a while now (I’m considering myself not as a noob anymore)

    So I want to share an idea to the community:
    (This is my first thread in this forum)

    So, assume the following situation:
    You are fighting another player and both of you are at low life.
    Now both are going to start their final attack at the same time, but you are a little bit quicker and kill your opponent, before youself get killed. But what about the enemies blade which may has been swinging towards you? It simply “disappears”, losing all of its energy.

    I would suggest that, when your opponents blow is in a final state and would have hit you in the next moment, his weapon, despite of him beeing “dead” still has enough momentum to hit you and might kill you if you’re low-life. And really, only when the opponents weapon was very close to kill you, not when he was just going to start his attack.

    At the current state it depends rather on luck, which player wins in such a situation, you either think "lol, that was close :P " or "ARRR come on, my axe was just 10cm away of his head! Lucky *******! :x "

    I think the possibility of two player killing each other would make it more logical for the player and more fun.
    Please tell me what you think.



  • Sounds interesting…

    Not sure about balance issues, but I must admit it feels funny that the outcome of certain situations depend so much on your opponents health.
    For example if you fight a maul/zweihander user with a MAA and you hit him while his overhead to your head is in release. If hes on low health you kill him and have full health, if he has enough health he survives and kills you.



  • I rage all the time because “AAAW MAAAN, I HAD YOU! I HAD YOOOOOU!!! I was literally ONE inch away from chopping your head off!”

    So yeah, I’d want this. Although I would probably rage just as much when I stab some guy before he could take a swing at me, but I was slow enough to have him actually gain some momentum and chops my head off anyways.

    So nah, I don’t want this anymore.



  • @Ravengrim:

    I think the possibility of two player killing each other would make it more logical for the player and more fun.
    Please tell me what you think.

    It would make duels a little strange where you are both dead but one person wins.



  • I’m very much against this. Killing someone a split second before their hit lands is mostly a skill based maneuver and one that I use and have seen used on me. It’s rarely a chance thing if ever. Seeing two warriors kill each other would be pretty silly as well.



  • @gregcau:

    It would make duels a little strange where you are both dead but one person wins.

    Let’s just say that it was a pyrrhic victory. :P



  • @gregcau: Yeah, that would be a problem I’ve not thought about as I haven’t played duels often. You’re right, it really would be strange. Maybe this “feature” wouldn’t be in duel mode. Or considering the duels in early modern Europe (those with agreed-upon rules, etc., you know), there actually were frequently some duels where both duelists died. Would a draw in a duel be a possibility for this game?

    @Slight: I know what you mean, and if you have a faster weapon than your opponent this is your tactical advantage in such a situation of course. But you say, it is skill based to hit someone “a split second before their hit lands”, so if you know your weapon is faster you’re starting your attack right when your opponent starts his attack and that’s ok. Therefore I said

    And really, only when the opponents weapon was very close to kill you, not when he was just going to start his attack.

    I mean this, like only when your opponent’s weapon was just touching your neck for example.
    So it’s all about the slashes beeing finished at the same time not beeing started at the same time.
    This situation I’m talking about is, when it really mostly depends on luck, as there is also always a little internet delay. So wouldn’t this replace a luck-based matter with maybe a silly but consistent process which would be logical for the player.
    I think it would not affect the way you are using your maneuver. I didn’t want the fast weapons to lose their advantage as the speed is mostly their only one, like the short sword. That would cause a balance problem.

    @SavageBeatings

    Although I would probably rage just as much when I stab some guy before he could take a swing at me, but I was slow enough to have him actually gain some momentum and chops my head off anyways.

    Like I said, if you stab someone before he takes a swing at you, then it’s ok and you’re rewarded.
    But I think if two players just hit themselves at (nearly) the same time and not after half a second or something, it would be fair to reward both players equally. Would you also “rage” if you would not know which player now was actually a few milliseconds faster? Like, adding a new symbol appearing in the top right corner (where the kills stand) when two kill each other simultaneously and not sequentially your kill then your your opponents kill appearing in the list. Then you would just see that both of you were equally fast to kill each other.

    I might seem too much engaged with this “rage”-matter but I think that is just the point:
    Raging about something is an important issue. I think everbody wants a game which is as balanced as possible. I do not like playing games where I’m just mad the whole time. And less rage is more fun, isn’t it? ;)

    And I also might seem to be too much convinced of my point of view as I am arguing each of you. :P
    But I love to discuss such topics, I’m open for any arguments and thank you for constructive crtitique. :D



  • In a real life situation this wouldn’t really happen. The swing wouldn’t be lethal. The users is no longer or has changed the direction of the force, or the weapon twisted so the lethal part doesn’t come into contact.

    At best it would be like throwing the weapon. But there would be so force behind it and it will have an awkward angle.

    It would never be enough to kill a man.



  • Ok, that is reasonable. I see, two warriors chopping their heads off would be very silly.
    But what would actually happen in a real life situation were injuries which don’t kill one immediately.
    Bleeding to death or something.
    I heard, in War of the Roses you can bleed to death and your team mates can help you if you’re downed. This would be more realistic.

    I see my idea was kinda silly :D



  • @lemonater47:

    In a real life situation this wouldn’t really happen. The swing wouldn’t be lethal. The users is no longer or has changed the direction of the force, or the weapon twisted so the lethal part doesn’t come into contact.

    At best it would be like throwing the weapon. But there would be so force behind it and it will have an awkward angle.

    It would never be enough to kill a man.

    LOL! Wounds are rarely instantly fatal, you can keep fighting with some mortal wounds for minutes.



  • I’m sure a Maul heading towards your face would still kill you even if its wielder dies mid-swing. :P



  • @AngryDave:

    I’m sure a Maul heading towards your face would still kill you even if its wielder dies mid-swing. :P

    Yeah I think with the maul it wouldn’t really matter if he was holding it or not.

    I was more talking about swords, axes and spears. And the fact that people have armour.



  • It would make duels a little strange where you are both dead but one person wins.

    That happened fairly often in days of yore. Whilst one duelists would die outright, the others wounds often got infected and they died within weeks.

    I use this mechanic quite often in-game. If you see an opponent barely alive come rushing at you, you don’t have to worry about the hit trade and as long as you hit first, you will strike them down with no damage to you. It is perfectly possible to judge that accurately.

    Sucks when you miss judge and they stay alive and cop a hit heheh



  • So maybe 2handers should kill you if the weapon is inches away from you, regardless if the wielder is dead or not?

    It would help with 1h being so superior atm.



  • @Del:

    It would help with 1h being so superior atm.

    lololol….

    the only issue I have with this is when arrows and projectiles disappear on death.


Log in to reply