Let's Brainstorm! (melee combat!)

[TeckXKnight]

While it is a sound idea, it homogenizes both of the combat stats into virtually the same thing. It'd be nice if they were different in some significant way, shape, or form. As is they have very clear divides but one obviously falls short of the other.

[pyrale]

While it is a sound idea, it homogenizes both of the combat stats into virtually the same thing. It'd be nice if they were different in some significant way, shape, or form. As is they have very clear divides but one obviously falls short of the other.

Well, I would rather have them differentiate by their move effects than by how they use underground calculations, to be honest. Especially when this involves one style gains an enormous advantage while fighting the other.

[cloakblade]

Are you saying to make delta based on melee or UA because I don't know if it would make Melee OP or not but I still don't like it, simply because I don't like the idea of a 1 UA fight being able to fight on his own.

Well, I just find it silly that an armoured knight with a shield and a sword needs unarmed skill to fight :p.

Really? You don't see why armor knights need to know how dodge and move around. If we put this in game terms your 1 UA knight could punch an ant to death. If we put it in more real life terms your knight can't dodge and can't move quickly at all. This versus someone who can move quickly (lets call him a pirate because he will probably have a sword) the pirate is able to dodge and roll behind the knight while all the knight can do is take blow after blow letting his armor do a large majority of the work for him.

The other reason people wear heavy armor (real life and in game) is because of archers. Being caught off guard by an arrow can mean death especially if there's a squad of archers. So your supposed balancing act is interesting due to the fact that you almost make it rock paper scissors due to UA beats MC, MC beats Ranged, Ranged beats UA, this is an interesting idea but will have much different consequences than what you are considering.

Wouldn't just replacing UA by max(UA, melee) fix this though ? Or would there still be imbalances between melee and UA ?

I'm not sure what you're saying. If you're suggesting a hardcap on UA set by armor, then I don't stand behind you at all.

correct me if I'm wrong, but delta is sqrt(your UA/their UA) right ?

What I was saying was that changing this formula to sqrt (max(your UA, your melee)/max(their UA, their melee)).
This would not give melee fighters the advantage to use manoeuvers, but atleast they wouldn't systematically be disadvantaged while fighting UA warriors.

Is that comma a plus sign an "or" or what? In either of those case ("or" or plus) I can't see any reason to go UA.

[pyrale]

Really? You don't see why armor knights need to know how dodge and move around. If we put this in game terms your 1 UA knight could punch an ant to death. If we put it in more real life terms your knight can't dodge and can't move quickly at all. This versus someone who can move quickly (lets call him a pirate because he will probably have a sword) the pirate is able to dodge and roll behind the knight while all the knight can do is take blow after blow letting his armor do a large majority of the work for him.

Not going to start a pirate vs. knight argument, how an unarmed guy would stand no chance against a guy with a sword and skill to use it or how realistic it is that ants are dangerous opponents, but you don't rely heavily on dodging in a fight when you have a shield, usually. And you rely even less on it when you wear plate.

Is that comma a plus sign an "or" or what? In either of those case ("or" or plus) I can't see any reason to go UA.

it's an "or", max being the function that selects the highest of the two given members.
besides, you would still want to go UA for the manoeuvers, I'd say.

[TeckXKnight]

Ah, I understand what you're saying now. So just for determining delta and nothing else, utilize the higher of UA/Melee. That is an unusually confusing statement to read as I immediately associate linking delta to having and using maneuvers. I'm less apprehensive about your suggestion and I don't think it'd be particularly damning to UA users. The issue still being that Melee wouldn't have access to any type of maneuvers, severely restricting their speed in combat to a pace that isn't competitive at similar skill levels with UA.

[cloakblade]

Really? You don't see why armor knights need to know how dodge and move around. If we put this in game terms your 1 UA knight could punch an ant to death. If we put it in more real life terms your knight can't dodge and can't move quickly at all. This versus someone who can move quickly (lets call him a pirate because he will probably have a sword) the pirate is able to dodge and roll behind the knight while all the knight can do is take blow after blow letting his armor do a large majority of the work for him.

Not going to start a pirate vs. knight argument, how an unarmed guy would stand no chance against a guy with a sword and skill to use it or how realistic it is that ants are dangerous opponents, but you don't rely heavily on dodging in a fight when you have a shield, usually. And you rely even less on it when you wear plate.

Pirate is just a term I used, it could have been anyone of a half dozen different ideas.

The ability to move around is key in battle, position yourself with the sun/moon to blind an opponent, gaining higher ground, getting behind your opponent or even getting onto the side that they can't attack you from. All these play very specific rolls in combat and are almost impossible to simulate in-game. I could agree to the idea that plate should cause a slight drop in UA stat, but then all UA people would run around in chainshirts. And it also matters if we are talking about dueling or group. In a group battle Melee is already useful they can quickly finish off a crippled opponent. Though in a duel (1v1) UA wins (for the most part their may be exceptions).

[pyrale]

The ability to move around is key in battle, position yourself with the sun/moon to blind an opponent, gaining higher ground, getting behind your opponent or even getting onto the side that they can't attack you from. All these play very specific rolls in combat and are almost impossible to simulate in-game. I could agree to the idea that plate should cause a slight drop in UA stat, but then all UA people would run around in chainshirts. And it also matters if we are talking about dueling or group. In a group battle Melee is already useful they can quickly finish off a crippled opponent. Though in a duel (1v1) UA wins (for the most part their may be exceptions).

Are you talking about real life or how it should be in HnH ? Because from my experience, there is no chance an unarmed guy will win over a guy with a sword, ever.
As for what it should be ingame... Well, something balanced I guess. But if UA gets to get every manoeuver twice as effective on melee users for free, it will be hard to balance them.

edit : but I'm talking too much, I mainly went there to read :p.

[cloakblade]

The ability to move around is key in battle, position yourself with the sun/moon to blind an opponent, gaining higher ground, getting behind your opponent or even getting onto the side that they can't attack you from. All these play very specific rolls in combat and are almost impossible to simulate in-game. I could agree to the idea that plate should cause a slight drop in UA stat, but then all UA people would run around in chainshirts. And it also matters if we are talking about dueling or group. In a group battle Melee is already useful they can quickly finish off a crippled opponent. Though in a duel (1v1) UA wins (for the most part their may be exceptions).

Are you talking about real life or how it should be in HnH ? Because from my experience, there is no chance an unarmed guy will win over a guy with a sword, ever.
As for what it should be ingame... Well, something balanced I guess. But if UA gets to get every manoeuver twice as effective on melee users for free, it will be hard to balance them.

edit : but I'm talking too much, I mainly went there to read :p.

Well I don't think the guy who is more agile to be unarmed, he should have a weapon. In HnH I'm pretty sure that a full UA guy usually wins in a duel (that one was for in game sorry for the confusion) though it is true an unarmed man couldn't win.

Though it is true its hard to balance everything when a UA guy has maneuvers. Though it does matter how we want to balance it.

[TeckXKnight]

Though it does matter how we want to balance it.

Here is where I agree heavily with Potjeh's contribution that melee should be unique in its approach to combat. Unarmed currently has an entire subset of abilities which are giving it its edge. Surely melee can be given somethings that can act as a mutually exclusive counter balance to this.

[Elden]

Maybe it would be better just to improve all that few uniqe things the MC has?
for ex: 1.5 weight for shield, 2.0 weight for vailorous and 1.75 weight for cleave.

this may seem both OP(ahh! one vailor strike kcnocks off all the defence!(UA=MC)) and still UP(dmn! i still have to build up the initiative and my shield lasts only for three punches!(UA=MC)).
As for Cleave... noone use it anyway... maybe a small dmg boost?