Flinch Times.



  • Why can’t we just have 1.0 flinch on 2-handers, .9 flinch on one-handed axes and maces, .8.5 flinch on one-handed swords? Since swords seem to be the goto option, a slightly lower flinch time might indirectly buff axes and maces.

    Discuss.



  • 1.0 flinch on 2 handers was a train wreck, we’ve already experienced it.

    The only issue now is if 0.8 should actually stay or not, or go to 0.9.

    0.9 2h flinch would make hit-trading less dumb against fast weapons, but GREATLY lower the risk of doing insta-hits.



  • 1.0 2h flinch times would only make sense on the slowest of weapons like Zwei/Maul.

    The more and more we discuss the more it shows that we eventually need to go for unique flinch times individualised for each weapon and not categorising them under 1h and 2h flinch times.

    9 makes sense as it lessens the combo trades. But like Nova said, weapons that can instant hit while also having a great drag potential will get an unneeded buff from this. TB just need to fix FiR, as well as nerfing the appropriate weapons that already benefit so much from insta hits as well as having great dragging potential i.e. Messer, Greatsword, Shortswords/Daggers (something needs to be done to these so people don’t just spam stab through your combo and come out clean).



  • Well I was thinking about Swords, Maces and Axes having.their own unique flinch times, and special.weapons like flail and staff being tweaked separately.



  • http://forums.tornbanner.com/showthread.php/20880-Dynamic-flinch-system

    There are many threads on flinch times. I think TB probably got the message at this point.



  • We dont have a reply from TBS so there is no reason so asume the got they message (i could be wrong about the reply part)

    Individual timings is where the discussion is going.

    Maybe it would be smarter to not have the attackers weapon determen the flinch time , instead the defending weapon determins the flinch time.
    The faster the weapon of the defender the longer he is flinches and so on.

    Or you could do a large Table with every weapon vs every other weapon. Which is the easies thing from which we know it will definitly work.



  • @TheFunnySide:

    We dont have a reply from TBS so there is no reason so asume the got they message (i could be wrong about the reply part)

    Individual timings is where the discussion is going.

    Maybe it would be smarter to not have the attackers weapon determen the flinch time , instead the defending weapon determins the flinch time.
    The faster the weapon of the defender the longer he is flinches and so on.

    Or you could do a large Table with every weapon vs every other weapon. Which is the easies thing from which we know it will definitly work.

    Interesting suggestion you have. Definitely worth exploring. Problem is if two people with fast weapons then fight each other they have unnecessarily long flinch times. And other issues spawn from that but if you have the attackers weapon determining flinch at least then the flinch is exact for what combo is coming to hit the defender again.

    As for a TB response: TB devs have always said ingame and places on the forum that they read the things that are said. There was a balance ideas req thread from them not too long ago and flinch was mentioned many times. They don’t talk much on the forums, especially on things that are a bit controversial and that’s because most people are a bunch of wankers and it would only serve getting them flamed. I like to think they read though.



  • Yes two people fighting with fast weapons will get flinched unnessarily long but maybe with is the punishment of fast weapons.
    I only play fast weapons and i could live with getting stunned 1.0 its not like you cant dodge or block.
    It mean your opponent can prob. combo feint his fast weapon and bring himself in a position there he has all options avalible ,
    not the end of the world imho



  • @TheFunnySide:

    Yes two people fighting with fast weapons will get flinched unnessarily long but maybe with is the punishment of fast weapons.
    I only play fast weapons and i could live with getting stunned 1.0 its not like you cant dodge or block.
    It mean your opponent can prob. combo feint his fast weapon and bring himself in a position there he has all options avalible ,
    not the end of the world imho

    Perhaps. In my opinion a low flinch time between two fast weapon users (think maa vs maa) will actually get more depth in that they are flinched for less time.



  • I think longer flinch for quicker weapons is the opposite direction we need to go in. I also don’t think I like the idea of flinch being determined by the victim’s weapon, rather than the attacker. Seems counter-intuitive, unless using a bigger weapon were to mean you’d get flinched longer. Then you could switch to a quicker secondary and not have as long a flinch time. Would be kinda weird.



  • fast weapons get low flinch times because they are fast enough as it is

    slow ones get longer flinch times to avoid getting traded or flinched during successful combos :P

    not too difficult TBS!



  • @TheFunnySide:

    Maybe it would be smarter to not have the attackers weapon determen the flinch time , instead the defending weapon determins the flinch time.
    The faster the weapon of the defender the longer he is flinches and so on.

    This would be an enormously frustrating system.



  • @zombojoe:

    fast weapons get low flinch times because they are fast enough as it is

    slow ones get longer flinch times to avoid getting traded or flinched during successful combos :P

    not too difficult TBS!

    I don’t see why people are even arguing. This is all that needs to be said.

    Maybe it would be smarter to not have the attackers weapon determen the flinch time , instead the defending weapon determins the flinch time.
    The faster the weapon of the defender the longer he is flinches and so on.

    Are you trying to antagonize people with these awful ideas?



  • @Flippy:

    I don’t see why people are even arguing. This is all that needs to be said.

    Because lookdowns / instahits need to have some risk. And from what I can tell, I doubt people want DW style instahits.



  • @NoVaLombardia:

    Because lookdowns / instahits need to have some risk. And from what I can tell, I doubt people want DW style instahits.

    What is the risk exactly if you combo into a lookdown OH? That is by far the SAFEST move for you to do, as it minimizes the possibility of hittrades. Or are you implying the ground flinch is the risk? You can still parry if you hit your opponent, which isn’t hard with lookdown overheads.



  • @NoVaLombardia:

    Because lookdowns / instahits need to have some risk. And from what I can tell, I doubt people want DW style instahits.

    I got hit traded by norse sword knight mid combo when I was comboing overheads with longsword today. No, I did not accelerate or delay either of the overheads.

    Current flinch heavily favors fast weapons and it punishes more than just “instahits”.

    I don’t expect to be safe when comboing with maul delays or zweihänder delays but getting traded while comboing with longsword is ridiculous.



  • @Monsteri:

    What is the risk exactly if you combo into a lookdown OH? That is by far the SAFEST move for you to do, as it minimizes the possibility of hittrades. Or are you implying the ground flinch is the risk? You can still parry if you hit your opponent, which isn’t hard with lookdown overheads.

    you got this wrong, you “should” have a risk if you open up with a lookdown, like parry into lookdown repose. After this you are prone to getting flinched in your combo. But its not working that well



  • should be .9 again.

    1.0 would be too long in my opinion and make combo-feints god tier.


Log in to reply