Let's Brainstorm! (melee combat!)

[Zampfeo]

-Add a maneuver named parry for melee, mimics Dash!, adds a little defense based on delta, gives IP based on defense weight is 1.0 so you still want to use your shield when you can (need axe or sword to use, can't parry empty handed) this would also bring b12s to the forefront I'm sure they need a lot of IP, and they can't equip a shield so they are forced to increase both UA and melee

Was pretty tired when I wrote the rest, this is the one I stand by the most, the metal shields idea has merit, but this one is the one I'd like to see most.

Death and glory except you gain defense instead of losing it? The weight needs to be around .5 to balance it.

[cloakblade]

If the ability to use the metal shield was also based on you using the shield maneuver I think its the best suggestion in the list.

The maneuver seems too good to me. And even with that you are still going to be upping both Melee and UA for fighting so that way you don't get creamed by full UA guys. 1 UA builds will never be viable unless you are running some sort of group where you can use a good valor strike to deal around 66% of a bar with all the penetrating damage doing a good amount too. This could easily be a 1-2 punch with your UA buddy backing you up.

[Woot]

Death and glory except you gain defense instead of losing it? The weight needs to be around .5 to balance it.

Not really, Like I said, Dash, and considering the only melee maneuver is block, 1.25 defense, you're still taking a beating if your caught in it

By the example set with shield stance, melee is supposed to be the more defense oriented combat anyways, the IP should be obvious, that's the worst thing about melee builds, they need lots and lots of IP, but death or glory is UA based, with this maneuver, you could easily hold your own against a UA fighter of equal caliber

It's a nice little yin-yang, UA would still have exclusive access to bloodlust, and melee would still have block! allowing a melee fighter to double up his moves like a UA fighter does but in different ways would be the only way to balance things that I can see

The idea is that slide and oak stance are very similar both cost offense, and grant defense
Slide Effect: -15% attack, +15% defense
Oak stance Effect: -10% attack, +5% * Delta Defense (delta is capped at two)

What I'm trying to suggest, is that a new maneuver is built based on Dash! in the same way that Death or glory is based on charge
Death or glory Effect: -10% defense, +Delta Initiative.
Effect: +3% attack, -8% defense, +1 Initiative.

Parry would be:
Effect: +3% delta defense (oak stance has 5%) +Delta Initiative. (or just + initiative, doesn't have to be tied to delta)

Dash! Effect: +6% defense, +1 Initiative
As you can surmise, with the delta capped at two, you would be getting the same affect as dash

[daemmonium]

Oak stance Effect: -10% attack, +5% * Delta Defense (delta is capped at two)
Death or glory Effect: -10% defense, +Delta Initiative.
Parry Effect: +3% delta defense (oak stance has 5%) +Delta Initiative. (or just + initiative, doesn't have to be tied to delta)

Compare this 3 and tell me Parry isnt overpowered... Damn, even taking off the +3% Δ Defense it would still be a little OP.
All maneuvers have a pro and a cons, Oak with the attack, D&G with defense, and Bloodlust with 1/2 weight.
I guess the whole idea of adding a negative effect on maneuvers was for the mere point of not making 1 maneuver the best, or to actually make people swap maneuvers a lot which would imply more skill involved rather than just raw stats.

MC is UP, but changes have to be thought and applied with severe thinking beforehand. I for sure dont know the whole depth of the combat system enough to throw a good idea that would imbalance things, sorry that I posted to throw negative feedback only.

[cloakblade]

I want to double check you are supporting a full Melee build (1 UA) right? Just want to make sure. If you aren't the following may not apply to you.

So what is the delta against? Is MC vs UA or UA+MC or just MC? Because if its just UA then full melee versus full melee will be silly as both players will be gaining 6% defense and 1 IP each time the other moves. Even if you both have flex on that's 6 moves before you have 90% of your attack meter in which time the other gains 36% defense which all though you can break if they are still getting back half your attack for free and you are doing the same. If its just MC then you are making delta become either 1 or 2 in most case (their are of course 50:50 builds like in my post I made a little bit ago in the How Do I forums). And if you make it both I could see it being almost okay as you will most of the time being not seeing too much over delta. In fact a lot of UA people will be beating you as they will have some Melee combat which will lead to them having more over all combat skills than you.

The maneuver you are also suggesting has no way of being stopped. Death and Glory stops working when you have no defense bar, Oaken stance stops working when you have no more attack, and bloodlust... Well bloodlust has a half weight issue if you are caught taking a punch with it up you will take 2x the defense hit this also means that the opponent only needs half his attack meter to do the same amount of damage. All those maneuvers have a give and take mechanic, where your maneuver is only give. The only supposed take is that you aren't running with more than 1x weight which isn't saying much. If it say gave your opponent something I could maybe get behind it, but even then you are taking away something UA has unique to them.

Instead of just trying to think of how we can make everything equal by giving them similar mechanics (maneuvers) think of how to give a unique mechanic to Melee. The piercing damage is an interesting idea, maybe add daggers? The sledgehammer as a weapon idea was interesting because you could make a mechanic that dealt more damage to the armor or pierced it fast. There are probably other things you could think of, if it wasn't finals week I'd gladly help but for now I only have enough time to be negative.

Edit: Damn some of this stuff was ninja'd

[bmjclark]

Oak stance Effect: -10% attack, +5% * Delta Defense (delta is capped at two)
Death or glory Effect: -10% defense, +Delta Initiative.
Parry Effect: +3% delta defense (oak stance has 5%) +Delta Initiative. (or just + initiative, doesn't have to be tied to delta)

Compare this 3 and tell me Parry isnt overpowered... Damn, even taking off the +3% Δ Defense it would still be a little OP.
All maneuvers have a pro and a cons, Oak with the attack, D&G with defense, and Bloodlust with 1/2 weight.
I guess the whole idea of adding a negative effect on maneuvers was for the mere point of not making 1 maneuver the best, or to actually make people swap maneuvers a lot which would imply more skill involved rather than just raw stats.

MC is UP, but changes have to be thought and applied with severe thinking beforehand. I for sure dont know the whole depth of the combat system enough to throw a good idea that would imbalance things, sorry that I posted to throw negative feedback only.

There would be the con of the parry maneuver only having 1.00 weight. Might be best to reduce the defense even further. But getting 1 iniative (maybe 2 if you have the advantage in combat skills) really isnt that OP at the cost of .25% weight.

[cloakblade]

If it traded attack it could maybe be considered okay. And its a 20% reduction of defense and that is compared to the defense of block not the defense of UA.

[Potjeh]

What I'd like to see is weapon-specific manoeuvres, to flesh out the weapons more and make room for more different ones. Also, to keep melee feel different from UA, the manoeuvres should operate on the opponent rather than you. For example, with a spear you could use Brace manoeuvre, which would decrease the opponent's defence, but would have defence weight under 1.0. Or with a sword you could use Parry, to take out opponent's IP at cost of your defence.

[daemmonium]

What I'd like to see is weapon-specific manoeuvres, to flesh out the weapons more and make room for more different ones. Also, to keep melee feel different from UA, the manoeuvres should operate on the opponent rather than you. For example, with a spear you could use Brace manoeuvre, which would decrease the opponent's defence, but would have defence weight under 1.0. Or with a sword you could use Parry, to take out opponent's IP at cost of your defence.

This could be a great idea. The point that I like most is the variability of builds that those things may lead, which will mean different battles, and not knowing wtf you're gonna fight against next time.

[pyrale]

My stupid uneducated comment :
If melee is gimped, why are 95% of the fighters in ICA wielding a sword, or having a sword in their inventory ?

Is there a way of improving melee users without making hybrids even better ?