by theTrav » Fri Nov 13, 2009 5:47 am Gaiadin wrote:I don't understand, unless you're referring only to the battleaxe. Currently block is 50% more effective at avoiding damage than dodge, so effectively Unarmed is 50% worse for defense, right?
You're right, but that's a very small part of the picture.
Punching has a much faster strike rate, and block has a much higher initiative gain rate, and additionally shield gives away more initiative, so the puncher is going to have vastly more attempts to hit the shield user and more special moves which will have a higher than 50% to-hit modifier and deal a whole lot more damage.
Not to mention the ability to have combat advantage constantly pulled towards the puncher due to the initiative move side step
Axehilt wrote:If Joe invests 100 in Combat Skill A and Bob 100 in Combat Skill B, and the two aren't almost identically balanced in combat strength, that's a fundamental design flaw.
That's your opinion. It ignores several factors that I've mentioned above that aren't directly related to combat. Haven and hearth is not all about combat. therefore I think your statement has little bearing on my point that unarmed opponents should be at a disadvantage over armed opponents.
Axehilt wrote:So really what you should've suggested is the removal of Unarmed entirely as a skill, because that makes far more sense than leaving it in but having it be a terrible choice.
I don't think I made any suggestions in the way of specific implementation, I stated a goal that I would like to see achieved, which is for unarmed opponents to be at a disadvantage to armed opponents. I don't give a crap how the dev's achieve it.
So really, what you should've done was read what I said, preferably a couple of times, thought about it, considered whether I really meant what you are trying to argue against, and then realised that, no, of course I wasn't suggesting a simple nerf or some other minor tweak of an existing broken system.
Having realised that, you should've refrained from posting an argument against a way that you would assume such a misguided tweak would be implemented.
Does it irritate you that I'm telling you what to do? It irritates me a little
