Dual wielding (customization)



  • Sure, it would take some new animations. But since we’re on the whole customization kick now, why not.

    This would be a purely aesthetic thing. The mechanics wouldn’t have to change, as the left hand swings would just use the alternate attacks.

    The offhand doesn’t do anything anyway, might as well add some spice to those who prefer to parry rather than block.

    thoughts?



  • Please not.

    I’m really not a fan of the rampant dual wielding you see in so many works of fantasy and it makes me actually glad that chivalry hasn’t gone this route. 1h weapons are fine the way they are. giving the off-hand the alternate also would just look silly and clunky. And doing it any other way would eiter make the second weapon pointless (or nothing but a parry weapon) or the whole thing OP as it would get much harder to read the animations.

    That beeing said: I wouldn’t mind if a rapier and parry dagger option was added as a weapon choice for MaA.

    In this setup lmb could be sidewards rapier jabs, wheel up rapier stab and wheel down dagger stabs (similar to the current dagger overheads). The parry animation would be done with the dagger. Perhaps give it really fast ripostes on lmb and mouse up. This would make for an interessting weapon imo.
    Otherwise: Please spare us the Drizzd clones.



  • There’s evidence in writing that the Germanic people duel welded weapons from several roman historians. And in Viking writings they occasionally duel welded weapons but that was rare even by their standards.

    A rapier and parry dagger was used quite a bit. But that was in duels and norther opponent wore armour as the rapier had no hope of piercing even chain mail. The dagger would do a better job against armour. Its more of a late 17th and 18th century duelling style.

    The rapier as a weapon was pretty hopeless. It was a show weapon and used for duels. Never for actual warfare. The sabre got reinvented again and became the dominate duelling weapon. As it could be use for both duels and war.

    Duel welding is not necessary and wouldn’t look great unless done properly. But then no one actually did it.



  • @CorvusFerreum:

    Please not.

    I’m really not a fan of the rampant dual wielding you see in so many works of fantasy and it makes me actually glad that chivalry hasn’t gone this route. 1h weapons are fine the way they are. giving the off-hand the alternate also would just look silly and clunky. And doing it any other way would eiter make the second weapon pointless (or nothing but a parry weapon) or the whole thing OP as it would get much harder to read the animations.

    That beeing said: I wouldn’t mind if a rapier and parry dagger option was added as a weapon choice for MaA.

    In this setup lmb could be sidewards rapier jabs, wheel up rapier stab and wheel down dagger stabs (similar to the current dagger overheads). The parry animation would be done with the dagger. Perhaps give it really fast ripostes on lmb and mouse up. This would make for an interessting weapon imo.
    Otherwise: Please spare us the Drizzd clones.

    I agree with you in that dual wielding has gotten a bit silly in some games. I’m willing to agree to being able to use only a dagger, or even a “smaller” weapon in the offhand. Dagger, short sword, or even maybe the saber.

    As stated above, the style is not unheard of, and it would be an acceptable alternative to having the offhand totally empty. I also don’t think the offhand alt attacks would be clunky at all. Assuming the new animations are done correctly. Additionally I don’t think it would be more difficult fighting someone using the offhand alt attacks, as the separate animations might even be easier to detect, as opposed to alt attacks from the same weapon arm.

    At any rate, its just a personal fluff thing that I wouldn’t mind seeing added to the game as they pursue deeper customization. The more the better, as long as it doesn’t effect the integrity of the game.



  • gJBEDxh0RQw



  • @SavageBeatings:

    gJBEDxh0RQw

    Heh. Entertaining for sure. But the argument he made against dual wielding is the same argument he made against having nothing in your off hand. It’s equally silly, if not more silly to have an empty off hand.

    But alas, this is a game, not derived fully from reality. A game. Therefor, having an empty offhand allows you to PARRY, as opposed to BLOCK. Why can’t I parry while using a shield in chivalry? Parrying clearly gives certain advantages over blocking in that you gain tempo in battle. You can riposte, consume a lot less stamina, and cannot be kick staggered.

    Because It’s a game. So by that logic, I still want to dual wield :)



  • ^actually, the last thing is really the most silly part. imagine carrying a sword in your right hand, and a shield in your left hand. you ‘parry’ an attack with your right hand, you can then riposte with your right hand. you ‘block’ an attack with your left hand, you can then NOT riposte with your right hand.

    but really it’s the ‘riposte’ which is implimented in a not too sensible way. they make it a faster type of strike then a normal strike, even if you use it to attack a completely different enemy then the one whose attack you parried.

    instead, they should just make you like flinched a very brief time when parried.

    on the empty offhand use…yes, it is a bit silly, too. but in my mind i see it as a strangely overly skilled support guy that is not an actual warrior.
    in warfare, all the soldiers would carry a shield, unless they used a two-handed polearm or bow, with two-handed swords being extremely rare up until the pike-and-shot formations of the renaissance.
    however, not all people in a battle were warrior soldiers. you also needed people to deal with wounded, to carry equipment like artillery or siege weapons, to carry extra munition or other supplies, as scouts or to relay information, battle situations and orders, and all sorts of purposes. it might make sense for those to only have a one-handed weapon.

    anyway, could be cool to have the option of secondary in empty off-hand. makes more historic sense than double headed maul or axe, as i’ve repeated in this forum about a dozen times now.



  • @Deadpan:

    ^actually, the last thing is really the most silly part. imagine carrying a sword in your right hand, and a shield in your left hand. you ‘parry’ an attack with your right hand, you can then riposte with your right hand. you ‘block’ an attack with your left hand, you can then NOT riposte with your right hand.

    but really it’s the ‘riposte’ which is implimented in a not too sensible way. they make it a faster type of strike then a normal strike, even if you use it to attack a completely different enemy then the one whose attack you parried.

    instead, they should just make you like flinched a very brief time when parried.

    on the empty offhand use…yes, it is a bit silly, too. but in my mind i see it as a strangely overly skilled support guy that is not an actual warrior.
    in warfare, all the soldiers would carry a shield, unless they used a two-handed polearm or bow, with two-handed swords being extremely rare up until the pike-and-shot formations of the renaissance.
    however, not all people in a battle were warrior soldiers. you also needed people to deal with wounded, to carry equipment like artillery or siege weapons, to carry extra munition or other supplies, as scouts or to relay information, battle situations and orders, and all sorts of purposes. it might make sense for those to only have a one-handed weapon.

    anyway, could be cool to have the option of secondary in empty off-hand. makes more historic sense than double headed maul or axe, as i’ve repeated in this forum about a dozen times now.

    Exactly right. All “realism” arguments go right out the window the second you see someone swinging around a hundred pound two handed hammer. You wanna talk silly…

    I’m willing to suspend belief though. I don’t have a problem with over the top weapons like the maul. It is after all a game. So for the sake of more customization, dual wielding doesn’t seem so far fetched.


Log in to reply