A way to fix feints for good. Remove Sub-Zero from the game.



  • @Rodelero:

    @Slaughtervomit:

    Sub Zero? I thought we were talking about Chivalry?

    I prefer Reptile

    The game needs invisibility…



  • @Dark:

    To defeat a feint you have to

    Let us count the ways.

    1. @Dark:

    be expecting it

    1. @Dark:

    leave yourself open to other types of maneuvers

    1. @Dark:

    read a situation and your opponent

    1. @Dark:

    you have to stick your neck out

    1. @Dark:

    you will be wrong sometimes

    Moral of the Story: @Dark:

    Stick your neck out.

    Google Translation into English: GUESS!

    Feinting. A pure chance element in a pure skill game.



  • I would like to point out the fact that The Radient is a player that does not play team based modes and also refuses to join servers with higher than 130ping

    For him to try and push his feintless agenda while only playing part of the game is a joke to me.

    What a weenie



  • @Halbardburton:

    refuses to join servers with higher than 130ping

    What’s wrong with that?



  • @c4ndlejack:

    @Halbardburton:

    refuses to join servers with higher than 130ping

    What’s wrong with that?

    If your ping is 130 stable i would say your a weenie. If your ping is 130 or even 50 erratic. Then I would understand why you would not want to join a server.



  • I play with Radiant all the time. He plays every gametype regularly. You’re flatly wrong.



  • @Dick:

    I play with Radiant all the time. He plays every gametype regularly. You’re flatly wrong.

    Nah im not wrong. he said this to me in front of two other people on steam chat. he is starting to play more modes now that its been called out. even though he says he doesn’t like team modes



  • I prefer dueling, that is no secret, but I play team games too. I don’t like pubs so much because most players refuse to acknowledge that cutting their allies heads off is not conducive to the objective.

    Coordianted team play is extremely fun.



  • @Lord:

    @Dark Symphony:

    To defeat a feint you have to

    Let us count the ways.

    1. @Dark:

    be expecting it

    1. @Dark:

    leave yourself open to other types of maneuvers

    1. @Dark:

    read a situation and your opponent

    1. @Dark:

    you have to stick your neck out

    1. @Dark:

    you will be wrong sometimes

    Moral of the Story: @Dark:

    Stick your neck out.

    Google Translation into English: GUESS!

    Feinting. A pure chance element in a pure skill game.

    Well what do you know! I guess those elements do make something 100% chance with no ability to truly account for them! This means feint must be removed, I guess?

    And so then how do we actually defeat players? With Kicks only?

    Oh yes. That’s right. Because everything you quoted above applies ATTACKS as well. By your definition hey are a pure chance element in a pure skill game (again with the ridiculous “skill is defined exclusively as the ability to watch weapons and parry them in Chivalry Medieval Warfare” definition).

    When you are fighting an opponent and choosing to attack you are EXPECTING that they won’t be attacking or will be attacking at a disadvantage to the situation, you are LEAVING YOURSELF OPEN to other maneuvers, you are READING THE SITUATION AND YOUR OPPONENT, you are STICKING YOUR NECK OUT and you WILL BE WRONG SOMETIMES.

    If you want to dance around their attack you need to be EXPECTING it. You are LEAVING YOURSELF OPEN, you are READING THE SITUATION, You are STICKING YOUR NECK OUT and YOU WILL BE WRONG SOMETIMES.

    Congratulations. You have just said that every offensive and defensive possibility in this game (including kicks, actually) is purely chance based in an attempt to rag on a mechanic you dislike for really bad reasons resulting largely from what seems to be a dramatic misunderstanding to how competition, games, people and this game itself works. All so you can champion having an extremely reliable fallback card under pressure. All so you won’t have to be at the mercy of your opponent if they decide to read your defensive posture.

    But at least you got to act coy so I guess that’s something.



  • Video proves nothing…. because it was removed



  • @Dark:

    When you are fighting an opponent and choosing to attack you are EXPECTING that they won’t be attacking or will be attacking at a disadvantage to the situation, you are LEAVING YOURSELF OPEN to other maneuvers, you are READING THE SITUATION AND YOUR OPPONENT, you are STICKING YOUR NECK OUT and you WILL BE WRONG SOMETIMES.

    The things you say are ridiculous and hilariously wrong. Attack animations are not invisible. If your opponent is attacking you at the same time as you are attacking him, you can see it. And then you can feint into parry. Your attempt to equate feinting with attacking would only make sense if attack animations were invisible and you had no way to know if your opponent was attacking or not. But you do. The game shows you, and you are not supposed to play it blindfolded.

    @Dark:

    If you want to dance around their attack you need to be EXPECTING it. You are LEAVING YOURSELF OPEN, you are READING THE SITUATION, You are STICKING YOUR NECK OUT and YOU WILL BE WRONG SOMETIMES.

    Also wrong. You can see their attack, you can parry if your dance goes wrong. If you get hit because of a failed dance, it’s because you missed something happening on your screen. Not because your opponent was hiding a feint behind his back until after you were forced to choose how to react, and then dropped it on you.

    Regardless of how you feel about feinting, feinting absolutely is unlike every other mechanic in the game - because it gives you no cues to what is happening until after you’ve chosen how to respond. Every other mechanic in the game shows you what it’s going to do, and gives you a chance to respond - and they push the boundaries of your ability to respond. You like to fluff it up with buzzwords like MINDGAMES and READ THE SITUATION, but the reality is there are no cues other than the ones your opponent chooses to give you, and that means the defensive end of feinting is really just a guessing game. You can defend feinting on the basis that you like guessing games in your chivalry (even though it’s totally out of place), but you can’t call feinting not a guessing game because that is flatly wrong in every way.



  • @DSMatticus:

    @Dark:

    When you are fighting an opponent and choosing to attack you are EXPECTING that they won’t be attacking or will be attacking at a disadvantage to the situation, you are LEAVING YOURSELF OPEN to other maneuvers, you are READING THE SITUATION AND YOUR OPPONENT, you are STICKING YOUR NECK OUT and you WILL BE WRONG SOMETIMES.

    The things you say are ridiculous and hilariously wrong. Attack animations are not invisible. If your opponent is attacking you at the same time as you are attacking him, you can see it. And then you can feint into parry. Your attempt to equate feinting with attacking would only make sense if attack animations were invisible and you had no way to know if your opponent was attacking or not. But you do. The game shows you, and you are not supposed to play it blindfolded.

    @Dark Symphony:

    If you want to dance around their attack you need to be EXPECTING it. You are LEAVING YOURSELF OPEN, you are READING THE SITUATION, You are STICKING YOUR NECK OUT and YOU WILL BE WRONG SOMETIMES.

    Also wrong. You can see their attack, you can parry if your dance goes wrong. If you get hit because of a failed dance, it’s because you missed something happening on your screen. Not because your opponent was hiding a feint behind his back until after you were forced to choose how to react, and then dropped it on you.

    Regardless of how you feel about feinting, feinting absolutely is unlike every other mechanic in the game - because it gives you no cues to what is happening until after you’ve chosen how to respond. Every other mechanic in the game shows you what it’s going to do, and gives you a chance to respond - and they push the boundaries of your ability to respond. You like to fluff it up with buzzwords like MINDGAMES and READ THE SITUATION, but the reality is there are no cues other than the ones your opponent chooses to give you, and that means the defensive end of feinting is really just a guessing game. You can defend feinting on the basis that you like guessing games in your chivalry (even though it’s totally out of place), but you can’t call feinting not a guessing game because that is flatly wrong in every way.

    Nonsense.

    1: You’re not thinking of the game as a whole. You’re thinking of two people standing there waiting for the other to attack like how you want the game to work. At some point SOMEONE is going to need to attack and when they do they are going to have to GUESS as to when it is safe to do so. You know those human reaction times you talk about when you say feinting is broken because the concept is 100% perfect? Yeah, those apply to attacking as well.

    Everyone who has played for any amount of time knows of the possibility of attacking at the WRONG time and getting hit because you made the wrong call and assumed your opponent would not be attacking at the time. I rely on this heavily. Backing up until my opponent feels safe to attack and then sprinting forward with an attack to catch them during the start up of the attack I, you guessed it, that’s right, here we go, PREDICTED.

    You can’t just attack willy-nilly in this game because you haven’t seen your opponent attack. Especially with a slow(er) weapon. I would like to say something along the lines of what you’d say like “you obviously don’t play this game” or something but I have a feeling you’re being willfully blind to the really obvious fact that if two opponents are facing each other with neither attacking, considering latency, queuing, human reaction times, etc., attacking solely because it doesn’t look like the other isn’t attacking at that moment is not 100% safe like you just said.

    2: To demonstrate that something is flawed, you have to state flaws. Not just things. “It doesn’t work like any other mechanic in the game” is not a flaw. It’s an observation.

    Guessing games are a core of any decent competitive game. You name me one without them. I’ve challenged you to do it often and you never take me up. Instead I have to read nonsense like “Chivalry isn’t like those games except for the fact that I am complaining about a mechanic that makes it just like those games so I guess what I want to say is that I don’t want Chivalry to be like those games and I’m justifying that sentiment by pretending it’s not while simultaneously complaining that it is.”

    There is 100% no problem with Chivalry doing what every strategic everything does… Mixing reaction and anticipation. Quit trying to design the game around people’s inability to read others and their desire to be able to play super defensively because it means they don’t have to risk as much.



  • @Dark:

    At some point SOMEONE is going to need to attack and when they do they are going to have to GUESS as to when it is safe to do so. You know those human reaction times you talk about when you say feinting is broken because the concept is 100% perfect? Yeah, those apply to attacking as well.

    Why is this so hard for you to understand? It’s really simple: going into windup does not make you vulnerable! It’s not something you commit to. It can be cancelled in favor of defense or a better offensive position at any time for a tiny bit of stamina. If you and your opponent attack at the same time, his windup will be slower than human reaction speed and you can see it (attacking doesn’t make you blind) and then double tap RMB to parry it. Or you can gamble and commit. Or you can not understand that feint>parry is a thing and always commit. The way in which you’re trying to equate feinting and parrying is flat out wrong. Windup is not a vulnerable state and recoveries can be negated.

    @Dark:

    Everyone who has played for any amount of time knows of the possibility of attacking at the WRONG time and getting hit because you made the wrong call and assumed your opponent would not be attacking at the time.

    But apparently all of this is completely news to you. The confidence with which you discuss pubstomping 101 like it’s relevant is honestly astounding. Or maybe you just ignored it in order to try and save your doomed argument. Who knows?

    @Dark:

    2: To demonstrate that something is flawed, you have to state flaws. Not just things. “It doesn’t work like any other mechanic in the game” is not a flaw. It’s an observation.

    Guessing games are a core of any decent competitive game. You name me one without them. I’ve challenged you to do it often and you never take me up.

    Hint: “I want Chivalry to be more like this other game X” isn’t an argument either.

    The reason feinting is a flaw in the context of being totally unlike the other mechanics is that it reduces the skill required to bypass an opponent’s parry. This is definitionally its purpose. If it explodes parries based on chance (and a very good chance at that, coinflip at optimal play), then finding ways to explode parries based on skill is simply redundant. And that means that so many of other chivalry’s complexities fall needlessly to the side as less valuable, because a feint will do what they can do, and do it more reliably. But that point has already been made to you, repeatedly, you just ignore it.



  • @Dark:

    Oh yes. That’s right. Because everything you quoted above applies ATTACKS as well.

    Well you just confirmed you’re crazy. Attacks can be seen coming and parried or sidestepped. Feints literally occur at the point where an attack either becomes a real attack or becomes a feint. War Sword feinting is especially popular because if you feint a stab, it looks exactly like a real stab. If the enemy does not parry, they get stabbed instantly. There is no pause that allows you to tell whether it’s a real feint or not. Up until you actually get stabbed, you can feint a stab. Likewise, up until you actually get stabbed, you can parry. The delay is nonexistent, there is no moment where you can say “that is a REAL stab and not just a feint” without actually suffering the stab.

    Feinting becomes guesswork for both parties, the feinter must guess whether to feint because the defender can parry right up until just before the stab while he himself can feint up until the same point. This occurs because the animation for a Knight stabbing with a two-handed sword is always the same right up until the thrust, which is instantaneous. When both players can delay their reactions to the most critical point in the animation before being forced to make a move, feinting becomes a game of chicken. Guess wrong and die. Slash feinting doesn’t have this disadvantage, a slash approaching your torso is a COMMITED slash, there is no feinting out of that. You can react to a slash feint. But the only way to react to a stab feint is if the player performing the feint chickened out too early and made the feint obvious. Had he held his ground till the last possible moment, there would be no time for you to gauge whether it’s a true stab or a feint stab.

    Your claims that identifying feints is possible defy human reaction time and ping allowances and disregard feints that bear no identifying marks that distinguish themselves from the real attack, such as with stab feinting with war swords. Killing feinters comes down to whether they are skilled enough to delay their reaction to the last possible moment or whether they are terrible and chicken out too early. I prefer stabbing people correctly with my war sword but will use feints in closed spaces, and as long as I stab feint prior to my true attack, no one is capable of identifying the difference. They must either guess that it will be a feint or potentially get stabbed for real.

    Again, it is pitifully easy to discern a war sword slash feint or overhand feint and parry it. Not all weapon animations allow this leisure time. The war sword’s stab is one of them, as long as I lead with a stab, my feints are unblockable with anything but guesswork. The weapon release is the time the blade remains lethal and stuck outward, however the actual forward thrust is as good as instantaneous.

    Slashes and Overhands have windup -> release -> hit.
    A stab with the war sword goes windup -> hit.
    There is no arc to a war sword stab that allows the feint to be perceived, no alteration in the animation, it’s the fastest attack type in the game for a reason. That’s not to say all stabs are unblockable because most one-handed stabs pull their arm backwards for the windup, allowing a fair amount of time between the release and the stab to react. War Swords do not allow such a convenience, partly because of the way the sword is held during the animation, partly because of the length of the blade as it is pointed directly at the enemy, and partly because it is the fastest two-hander knights have access to.

    I can parry right up until the stab, I can feint right up until the stab, and if neither occurs the stab WILL succeed. Since both actions are limited till the same point and there is no delay between the end of those actions and the infliction of damage, the feint cannot be countered. Repeat for the daft folk: this is not the same as slashes or overhands that have very obvious hit delays after the feint allowance has ended.

    @Dark:

    Guessing games are a core of any decent competitive game. You name me one without them. I’ve challenged you to do it often and you never take me up.

    Bollocks. StarCraft has no guessing involved, you can try to anticipate your enemy’s strategy, or you can SCOUT like you’re supposed to. Knowing whether you’re going to get zerged early game is as simple as checking whether the enemy base is producing gas. Maintaining map control and awareness is part of the strategy of StarCraft, getting sneak attacked by an army of Vipers means you failed to scout properly or your enemy has better map control.

    Dota is the same, wards allow you to have vision of any location you choose, it’s your choice what locations need vision. At any time you can see what items the enemy team is carrying, what abilities they have available, where they are on the minimap assuming they are visible. If you don’t want to ganked, you avoid the areas you don’t have visibility in. You don’t need to guess whether your enemy is building a BKB or going for Roshan, you can determine these things by checking his equipment and warding the area. Visibility is not guesswork, Chivalry has it as well. It’s up to you to pay attention to your surroundings and not get shot by archers, stabbed in the back, or slash through a teammate. Failure to watch your surroundings is your own fault.

    Even FPS games like CounterStrike rely on communication, audio cues like footsteps and explosions, or simple experience and defensible approaches. You don’t know where the enemy is, but that doesn’t mean you need to guess, it means you need to think strategically and cover all possible angles with your team as you move forward towards the objective. You don’t need to guess whether they are ahead, waiting in ambush, or flanking you, you need to be prepared for all three of those situations and react accordingly. Even should one of your team fall unexpectedly, the rest need to mount a counterattack using the death as information about the enemy’s location and their arsenal. Feinting with certain attacks does not allow for reaction time, counter strategies, or weighing the pros and cons of an action, it’s purely a coin flip between two equally oppurtune players that decides the fate of their duel. Beating feinters is more often than not THEIR OWN fault rather than some brilliance on your part.

    Heck even turn-based strategy games like XCOM or Bloodbowl have a great deal of “chance” involved, yet it’s not a guessing game, it’s risk management. There are proven workable methods of how to diminish risk to acceptable levels of tolerance, and getting screwed by the dice is accepted in those games because they are not competitive. RNG, guesswork, chance are the BANES of competitive play, competitive players frequently demand minimal to no randomness in a competitive setting because it detracts from skill when you lose because of a lucky proc. Some small amount of randomness sometimes exists only to throw kinks into the machine to create perfect imbalance (look up that term). It’s still more than manageable and nothing like a Do or Die feinting attempt that can easily result in your decapitation.

    Which brings us to the least random, least guesswork, most competitive of games: chess. Your opponent can’t do a damn thing that you couldn’t have saw coming from a mile away. You can predict his eventual strategy, you can deceive him into doing things he might not want to do, but you cannot perform an action where he must flip a coin that determines his success or failure. Everything in chess is predictable, everything is preplanned, to the point that mountains of study and research can be done on the game and you would still not master it in a lifetime. It has been ironed out to an exact science of carefully constructed moves and plays that are relatively unchanged for centuries, and it has never seen a patch or update because something was unbalanced.

    @Dark:

    Congratulations. You have just said that every offensive and defensive possibility in this game (including kicks, actually) is purely chance based in an attempt to rag on a mechanic you dislike for really bad reasons resulting largely from what seems to be a dramatic misunderstanding to how competition, games, people and this game itself works.

    Are you mad? Every offensive and defensive action in the game is VISIBLE within the bounds of human reaction time aside from feinting. It isn’t pure chance at all when there are reasonable counters to all of them. Swinging just as your enemy swings can be cancelled into a parry, or you can determine to let it follow through. It’s a choice you made and the speed at which the game runs means you need to make these choices quickly, resulting in the occassional error and subsequent DEATH. Feinting is the only element that denies an oppurtunity to counter or identify (at least in certain aspects) and is pure randomness in an otherwise highly skillful game. You’re even more loony if you think competitive gamers value RNG and randomness in their skill-based games. Yes, that makes sense, let’s all roll dice at each other to determine who is superior! Forums explode into uproar any time there’s even small amounts of it in a game, despite small amounts of randomness being necessary to keep from being static and dull. Yet even the miniscule random elements of those games are nothing next to binary choice feinting presents with Life or Death as your reward.

    @Dark:

    All so you can champion having an extremely reliable fallback card under pressure. All so you won’t have to be at the mercy of your opponent if they decide to read your defensive posture.

    This is a video game, your opponent does not have a defensive posture. His posture is unchanging from frame to frame. You do realize this, I hope? We are not fencing in your backyard, we are playing a video game. The only soul championing a cause here is you! Perhaps you are bad at dealing with parries, or you wish to continue killing the majority of players who don’t even use feinting or know what is to feel better about yourself. The original Age of Chivalry mod didn’t have feinting and we were able to murder each other for years, and still do in Chivalry without it! This new crutch was clearly implemented for YOUR benefit, not MINE.

    @Dark:

    But at least you got to act coy so I guess that’s something.

    And I mistook your nonsensical rant with fallacious reasoning for something worthwhile to respond to, easy mistake to make.



  • Here’s another video that makes alot of sense: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-fK9XGkGyE


Log in to reply