Utility Item Instead of Secondary Weapon



  • Secondary melee weapons in AoC were overall quite useless. The only real use they ever saw was on the Heavy Knight/Guardsman because those weapons were very slow and had a tendency to leave enemies with a sliver of health left if it didn’t kill them - plus the handaxe was overall better than the dagger.

    I’ve been thinking about what a good method would be for making secondary weapons a real meaningful choice in Chivalry, and what really came to mind was having the secondary slot be a utility customization rather than just another weapon you probably won’t use. What I mean by this is, you can choose an item to equip which enhances your class in a certain way either offensively, defensively or otherwise.

    Example; Man-at-Arms:

    -Marksman Kit
    Equips you with up to 3 Throwing Knives in the secondary slot which can be refilled at resupply points - ideal for combating shieldless enemies and archers from afar.
    -Defender Kit
    If using a one-handed weapon, equips you with a shield; if using a two-handed weapon, equips you with reinforced bracers that improve the effectiveness of parrying and sturdier chest armor that reduces the damage taken from body blows - ideal for defensive players or if playing against archers on open maps.
    -Endurance Kit
    Equips you with more lightweight lower body armor, increasing your sprint speed and reducing the stamina cost of sprinting - ideal for flanking and capturing objectives.
    -Duelist Kit
    Equips you with a dagger in the secondary slot; daggers can be switched to and away from very quickly, and while it does low damage at a very short range it swings quickly and cannot be parried. Daggers also do not use stamina to attack and have no damage penalty when at low stamina. - ideal for finishing wounded enemies who are playing defensively, or fighting when low on stamina.

    Almost infinite possibilities for a system like this, though it would be both easier and harder to balance than the alternative; easier because a choice between a second melee weapon with no special strengths and a ranged throwing weapon is an incredibly easy choice, but more difficult to actually strive for “perfect” balance in giving every kit about equivalent power in its given situation.



  • Although these are really good ideas they all need a draw back, and the only one i see is the one with the throwing knives having limited ammo. You would have to add a draw back on each “kit” for it to be balanced for gameplay.

    Marksman - Ammo limit

    Defender - you move slower

    Endurance - take more damage

    Duelist - dagger doesn’t cause flinching

    Those might not be the perfect ideas for them but you would need to add in something like that so you don’t just gain something, and you would have to make it so you’re not mimicking another class (defender = Knight), or make it not as effective and give the well armored MAA a different weapon load out.



  • @Vox:

    Although these are really good ideas they all need a draw back, and the only one i see is the one with the throwing knives having limited ammo. You would have to add a draw back on each “kit” for it to be balanced for gameplay.

    Marksman - Ammo limit

    Defender - you move slower

    Endurance - take more damage

    Duelist - dagger doesn’t cause flinching

    Those might not be the perfect ideas for them but you would need to add in something like that so you don’t just gain something, and you would have to make it so you’re not mimicking another class (defender = Knight), or make it not as effective and give the well armored MAA a different weapon load out.

    Why would they need a drawback? The drawback is you can only use one kit, so you forfeit the bonuses from another one. If there were the option to forfeit the secondary slot entirely, then yes I’d agree they would need a drawback, but otherwise it seems redundant.



  • you’re suggestion to use those is because the secondary weapon is pointless, so why would you give someone something amazing for them and not have a draw back? Saying the draw back is only being able to use one kit is like saying the draw back of every weapon is that you can’t use other ones.



  • @Vox:

    you’re suggestion to use those is because the secondary weapon is pointless, so why would you give someone something amazing for them and not have a draw back? Saying the draw back is only being able to use one kit is like saying the draw back of every weapon is that you can’t use other ones.

    Yes, that is exactly what the draw back of every weapon is. Equipping a mace instead of a broadsword doesn’t reduce your movement speed or health or anything like that. It just gives you a different weapon and thus a different combat style. Someone who took the endurance kit would be able to clear the map faster, reach objectives faster, and get to combat with more stamina; but they would be at a disadvantage when actually in combat against someone who took a combat oriented kit like a shield or throwing knives.



  • I agree that picking one item over the other is already a drawback.

    For example, lets see a couple TF2´s medic healing tools:

    -Medigun: normal healing speed, normal uber rate, uber effect is invulnerability, you can overheal

    -Quickfix: increased healing speed, increased uber rate, uber effect is fast healing

    None of the weapons has a drawback, both have different roles and abilities, one is better suited to pocket and help your team break fortified enemy positions, the other is better suited to keep your team healthy, specially useful in dinamic maps and when your team is low on medics.

    I also think it´s a good sugestion, giving players customization options that dont seem gamebreaking. Without stuff like this in the game, you play the game and use the class that fits your style the most. With stuff like this in, you can adapt different classes to your playstyle.



  • Even in TF2 all of the new weapons of draw backs if you read the description, they ALL have a minus because if they didn’t they would be OP, in order to balance things like this you have to have draw backs other than just that you can’t use other ones, because even with weapons in CBA armor will affect the damage they output so using different weapons in different situations means there will be draw backs.



  • @Vox:

    Even in TF2 all of the new weapons of draw backs if you read the description, they ALL have a minus because if they didn’t they would be OP, in order to balance things like this you have to have draw backs other than just that you can’t use other ones, because even with weapons in CBA armor will affect the damage they output so using different weapons in different situations means there will be draw backs.

    No, only the clone weapons had a downside.

    The Razorback doesn’t have a “downside”. Does that make it super OP and the other secondary sniper weapons worthless?

    Kritzkrieg doesn’t have a downside, in fact the only trait it has is +20% ubercharge. Does that make the Kritz a direct upgrade to the medigun?

    The answer to these questions is of course no, because they simply work differently and require a different playstyle to utilize. Hence the way it would be balanced with the system I’m proposing for Chivalry.

    I’m not saying there couldn’t be traits that were tradeoffs. If having a shield proved to be so good it wasn’t worth taking other perks, it could decrease your movement speed when equipped, or whatever. But I don’t see a reason to add needless downsides, that only further complicates the balancing process unless it’s absolutely necessary to do.



  • true, then let me propose this, if you were to wear a shield and armor kit for a MAA should it be equal to a kit with a shield and armor for a knight? or vise versa, should a knight be more adapt with the endurance kit than the MAA? or should they be equally adapt in using the kits? or should it just improve on the base health and armor of the chosen class and not be able to reach a different teir of class?

    what i mean by the last question is should a knight be able to move as fast as a MAA or should a MAA endure as much damage as a knight.



  • @Vox:

    true, then let me propose this, if you were to wear a shield and armor kit for a MAA should it be equal to a kit with a shield and armor for a knight? or vise versa, should a knight be more adapt with the endurance kit than the MAA? or should they be equally adapt in using the kits? or should it just improve on the base health and armor of the chosen class and not be able to reach a different teir of class?

    what i mean by the last question is should a knight be able to move as fast as a MAA or should a MAA endure as much damage as a knight.

    The kits would be on a per class basis. For example, archers wouldn’t be able to use a shield under any circumstances (not sure what’s being done about the Javelineer), throwables would be based somewhat on your primary weapon (throwing axes being higher damage but lower supply like in AoC, and any other new throwables that might be added also balanced accordingly). I think in the event that two classes share a kit, the bonus should be the same, but be % based; for example the endurance kit would increase sprint speed by 20% and reduce stamina cost by 20% (made up numbers with no basis in balance for the sake of example), so if a Man at Arms runs at 100 speed and a Knight runs at 50 speed (again obviously made up), the MaA is boosted to 120 and the Knight to 60.



  • ahh, ok, that’s what i wanted to know :)

    i just wanted to make sure you didn’t have a MAA as durable as a knight, your a knight as fast as a MAA :P

    this does sound like a great idea and a good alternative to my butter knife lol


Log in to reply