Is it just me, or is the longsword OP?

[Malice]

I'm currently 40 or so hours in the arena and have managed to get 2 master rank fellas. They both wear some of the best equipment in the game. Yet when I fight someone with a longsword I always get pownd, I've only been capable of killing a single longsword user. I think it's to die with its size. Since it can gain loads of speed with its swings it's like a Warhammer. Though full plate armour should be able to stop it from injury right. I've lost a hero sure to a longsword user and though I absolutely adore this game with everything, please nerf that thing. It kill my first fullplate character in 2 hits.

[Bare Mettle]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από chiconspiracy:

Thanks for the reply, I'll try to record some armor testing, but my character was definitely covered head to toe in metal over padded armor (and a helmet with a face mask).

The two handed polerams are way too slow compared to the greatsword, especially on the thrust. I've held accurate reproductions of both, and even though something like a halberd is front weighted, the spacing and grip means you have good control of the weapon and a pretty fast speed of point, beaten only by lighter polearms like spears. If you actually hold a greatsword, you'll notice that the long blade actually flexes quite a bit, which means a lot of energy lost on both blows and thrusts... it's no wonder that there isn't a single recorded instance of plate covered nobility using them to fight each other, overwhelmingly preferring polearms instead. Even a basic spear of comparable weight will deliver a lot more energy on the thrust than a big two handed sword.

As far as swords being useless against armor, there were specialized longswords with reinforced blades made to pierce the mail covered gaps in plate armor that would make a lot more sense as a "high tier" sword than the greatsword. I would also disagree about medieval swords being heavy, as Oakeshott said, "the average weight of any one of normal size is between 2.5 lb. and 3.5 lbs. Even the big hand-and-a-half 'war' swords rarely weigh more than 4.5 lbs" That's quite a bit less than the average polearm (which also has an impact advantage from superior leverage and being more front weighted).

Thrusts are generally too slow to be realistic, they used to be considerably faster, but we had to slow them down for balance reasons, they were just too good. Obviously other attacks are similarly slow, but it's not as noticeable because of the larger motions. This is an unfortunate consequence of pacing for gameplay reasons. I'm not aware of any noticeable disparity in thrusting speed between greatswords and polerams, but I can look into it. We are also looking to introduce new, shorter alternate grips for polearms, and making these sort of things have a much greater effect on at least the control over a thrust.

Regarding weight, there's two different points here. Our research tells us that greatswords (not longswords) specifically are generally heavier than polearms (at least poleaxe type ones), often significantly so. The other separate point is that European medieval swords in general tend to be heavier than swords from other regions or later time periods, including modern replicas of those same swords. This is probably largely due to poor material quality (basically impurities), which forced them to make broader and stiffer blades to avoid them breaking. Although blade stiffness is also a deliberate design quality in these swords, as they were often much more focused on thrusting than others.

Ultimately there's no hard and fast rules because weapons varied massively from one example to the next. But we're just now in the process of basically replacing every weapon in the game, reviewing their properties and the way they deliver damage, and indeed including this kind of variety from one example of a weapon to the next. This kind of discussion is very relevant and useful!

[Konrax]

From my understanding great swords in general were more status symbols than actual proficient battlefield weapons. Flamberges especially were meant to be terrorizing weapons at the front line but were not entirely useful when it came to one on one combat.

Medieval 1h swords tending to be primarily thrust based weapons so that they could be used on armoured targets while still be a very effective weapon against light / no armoured enemies.

Take the Knighly Arming sword for example as what I consider to be the most well balanced (versatile) combat weapon of the era. It was fast, well balanced, long reach, very effective slash, and exceptional stab. This made it an easy pick for finding weak points in plate and exploiting eye holes in helmets.

If you look at something more like the Wallace great swords they were usable on the battlefield because of the half grp (also used in polearms) but realistically it was never considered a good weapon for fighting heavily armoured enemies.

Armoured combat naturally moved towards pole axes and pole hammers because they could do damage to armoured enemies, shields were used less and less as armour became so effective the shield was no longer useful.

This is why european blades in general were heavier than blades from around the world because it needed to compensate for being usable against an armoured enemies. Sabers, scimitars, falchons, short swords, and tapered tipped blades all tended to be poor choices for armoured targets.

The classic long sword as depicted by Hollywood and game enthusiasts was actually a relatively short lived weapon and wasn't really that widely used in combat. A long sword vs an arming sword + shield usually didn't end well for the longsword user.

EDIT: This guys channel has lot's of instructional and information about medieval weapons and combat.

https://youtu.be/ZMHAHOd2QCY

[Bare Mettle]

It's just speculation really. We don't know all that much about what greatswords were used for. Some seem like they're more for show, but most examples were obviously designed as effective weapons. What seems pretty certain is that were incredibly difficult and expensive to produce compared to just about any other weapon, certainly not an accessible weapon. They are generally associated with champions on double pay, and likely as service weapons rather than privately owned due to their insane cost.

One assumption is they were used to guard important positions or people against multiple assailants by these champions. This is also consistent with the fighting techniques associated with these weapons. Whatever their historical use was, there is no doubt that due to their sheer mass if you hit someone in armour with it where it matters, it would hurt. And yet they can be quite nimble compared to something that is heavily balanced away from your grip. Again, it's all relative, you can't just say this works and this doesn't. Different weapons do different things better, but a weapon is a weapon.

Mostly within the context of the game I think it's important to not get too caught up in anecdotes or various historical considerations that are not even relevant. The HEMA community tends to be a bit excessive in its trying to dictate what should and shouldn't be done or work, and sometimes goes too far in the opposite direction from the myths they try to discredit, creating new counter-myths that are no longer logical either.

[chiconspiracy]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Bare Mettle:

It's just speculation really. We don't know all that much about what greatswords were used for. Some seem like they're more for show, but most examples were obviously designed as effective weapons. What seems pretty certain is that were incredibly difficult and expensive to produce compared to just about any other weapon, certainly not an accessible weapon. They are generally associated with champions on double pay, and likely as service weapons rather than privately owned due to their insane cost.

One assumption is they were used to guard important positions or people against multiple assailants by these champions. This is also consistent with the fighting techniques associated with these weapons. Whatever their historical use was, there is no doubt that due to their sheer mass if you hit someone in armour with it where it matters, it would hurt. And yet they can be quite nimble compared to something that is heavily balanced away from your grip. Again, it's all relative, you can't just say this works and this doesn't. Different weapons do different things better, but a weapon is a weapon.

Mostly within the context of the game I think it's important to not get too caught up in anecdotes or various historical considerations that are not even relevant. The HEMA community tends to be a bit excessive in its trying to dictate what should and shouldn't be done or work, and sometimes goes too far in the opposite direction from the myths they try to discredit, creating new counter-myths that are no longer logical either.

We do know who used the greatswords though... and we also know that the warrior elite are consistently depicted with polaxes, lances, specialized longswords, and rondel daggers time and time again, yet never with greatswords, who are best known for their use by mercenaries against less well armored enemies. The "double pay" association with greatswords is overblown. The majority of "dopplesoldner" for the Landsknecht were actually armed with pikes, halberds, or missile weapons and it's worth noting that several Swiss Cantons (who were some of the first to actually use the zweihander, and by far had the best record in melee combat) even banned the large two handed swords from their formations in favor of the halberd's reach, power, and versatility.

As far as a greatsword's power, sure you would feel the impact if it hit your armored head or arm, but it would be significantly less than that of a polearm on either the thrust or cut. Even a voulge of the same size (like the small one in the game) would hit you MUCH harder than a hilt weighted greatsword. Yet if you handle a historically accurate polearm the size of the ones in the game, you'll find them comparable or faster as far as speed of point on the thrust goes thanks to the superior grip you can use on a polearm haft.

[Konrax]

I think as a specialist weapon used for anti light infantry and light cavalry the greatsword would really shine. I think making it near useless against plate might hurt game play but even then I don't entirely doubt the weapon would be useless against someone in plate. Helmet visors/openings, as well as weak spots such as joints could be exploited with thrust attacks faster and more easily than most polearms aside from spears/pikes.

At the end of the day real combat would be far too complicated to really build into a game, I think it's important to try and mimic it generally but there has to be some room for it to also be a game with healthy mechanics. I think focusing more on the techniques of combat and theory and not getting too muddied with hyper realism is the best approach in my humble opinion.

If we wanted to be hyper realistic with armor, the game would be to get 4 or more men with pole axes all hitting one man knocking them to the ground and just continuing to spam chop/stab them, or knocking them onto the ground and jumping on them to use a dagger through a visor.

[chiconspiracy]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Konrax_tv:

I think as a specialist weapon used for anti light infantry and light cavalry the greatsword would really shine. I think making it near useless against plate might hurt game play but even then I don't entirely doubt the weapon would be useless against someone in plate. Helmet visors/openings, as well as weak spots such as joints could be exploited with thrust attacks faster and more easily than most polearms aside from spears/pikes.

At the end of the day real combat would be far too complicated to really build into a game, I think it's important to try and mimic it generally but there has to be some room for it to also be a game with healthy mechanics. I think focusing more on the techniques of combat and theory and not getting too muddied with hyper realism is the best approach in my humble opinion.

If we wanted to be hyper realistic with armor, the game would be to get 4 or more men with pole axes all hitting one man knocking them to the ground and just continuing to spam chop/stab them, or knocking them onto the ground and jumping on them to use a dagger through a visor.

Greatswords are ill suited to stabbing into the gaps of plate armor. Most examples do not have a highly tapered point, and the blades are far too large to reinforce the cross-section for piercing like the smaller longswords (like the Oakeshott Type XVII) the nobility used for the task. A polearm meanwhile will have a much sturdier spike or spearhead that will loose far less energy than the flexible greatsword blade. Greatsword blades are actually quite thin and primarily suited for opponents with very little (or no) armor.

[Konrax]

I agree with you but it's more the lower balance of the weapon and length that I would think it has some chance with stabs. They do look pretty solid for parrying and defense as well so I could see the case for them being good for guards of nobles, but they wouldn't likely be fighting full plate enemies but mobs of peasants so it makes sense for that role. It certainly wouldn't be my go to weapon for fighting heavy armoured enemies, an arming sword would be vastly better if you stay in the sword family.

Either way I would like to see them be included as a semi viable weapon still, but blade weapons in general should do a bit less damage to plate wearers in my opinion currently as well.

[chiconspiracy]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Konrax_tv:

I agree with you but it's more the lower balance of the weapon and length that I would think it has some chance with stabs. They do look pretty solid for parrying and defense as well so I could see the case for them being good for guards of nobles, but they wouldn't likely be fighting full plate enemies but mobs of peasants so it makes sense for that role. It certainly wouldn't be my go to weapon for fighting heavy armoured enemies, an arming sword would be vastly better if you stay in the sword family.

Either way I would like to see them be included as a semi viable weapon still, but blade weapons in general should do a bit less damage to plate wearers in my opinion currently as well.

At this point I'd be happy if pole weapons were made a bit faster, especially on the stabs. The better grip you have on them vs a sword means you can stab and recover very quickly, even on front weighted polearms like a halberd or voulge.

[calabacina]

as far as the game is concerned I agree that the 2-handed sword is op, in my experiences in the arena once I manage to buy it I become unbeatable (regardless of my armor and that of the opponent) this weapon is fast, powerful and with huge range: is pretty easy stay out of danger while attacking.

as far as historical realism is concerned, I cannot say and thank you for the information you are posting, by instinct I also say that they were more symbolic than useful (like most of the complete armor), I have searched for ancient fencing manuals and I cannot to find literature on the subject, unlike other weapons of the same era, it seems to me already a clue...

EDIT: i've found this on Quora
(https://www.quora.com/Are-greatswords-a-real-weapon-used-in-combat-or-is-it-a-more-recent-construct):


We have plenty of record and testimonials from the time that show that greatswords were used in combat. However its role as the anti pike weapon is more or less a myth. It was rarely used in close combat vs. pikes, and was primarily a skirmish weapon or a weapon to control space vs a larger number of enemies.


This is from Francesco Patrizi, “De paralleli militati di Francesco Patrizi. Parte II. Della militia riformata nella quale s’aprono, I modi, e l’ordinanze varie degli Antichi. Accomodate a nostri fuochi Per potere secondo la vera arte di guerra, con pochi vincere in battaglia la gran moltitudine de Turchi E di varie figure militari adorna. Con licenza de superiori.” 1595.

"It is not long since they introduced very long swords, which I don't know why, were called Frantopini, designed to wound first without danger. But they came to an issue opposite to their design, because they could not be unsheathed due to their length . However, they resolved to tote them unsheathed under the arm. But as it was uncomfortable, in the end they stopped using them. It is not less laughable the length of the swords used by the Swiss, in guarding princes, as well as in war. Due to their length, and weight, come to be too heavy to be handled with one hand, they lengthen the handle, for one hand and a half, to put both of them on it. And to be able to unsheath them, they leave them hanging from long pendulums from the belt. And because of its waving and rocking, they are obliged to always put their left hand on it, to avoid it from shaking and hitting the legs of anyone close. And with the other hand they hold the halberds, or the pike on the shoulder. And they don't realize that both hands are busy, or that while putting both of them on the pike, or the halberd for necessity, the sword will surely swing from those pendulums, impeding themselves and the ones close to the side or behind. And getting tight in close combat it (note: the sword) becomes totally useless. In wide space was better the greatsword that was used by their forlorn hope. Because they came out from the ordinance and once large spread they had easiness to swing them. In which way greatsword is quite of any help (note: or usable with easiness). The Italian and Spaniard infantry men toted the sword with pendulums too. And not to make it swing, they have found a particular piece of iron (Note: literally "iron"), on the really short pendulums, or even without it, which many times in private matters, catching in the hilts, has impeded the unsheathing. And many left wounded, and dead. So much better have decided to do the Landsknechten. They tote a very short sword, because while resting tight inside their battalions, the don't impede each other. And because it has proved much worth while getting tighter in close combat. But even though it has three not little issues. One is that they put so many guards for the hand all around the hilt that it is too light when hitting. And so it does wound lightly. The other is that, toting it fastened to the belt without pendulums, from the half behind they carried it even naked (Note: with no sheath). So that many times has happened that, inside the thicks, the fellow behind was stabbed by the sword of the one before him. The third issue was that they carry it without the tip for a crazy belief that the valuable man doesn't hit with thrust. But they have no 'cunning nor courage, of what importance are they against the enemy' (Note: this is a latin quote from Corebo during the Siege of Troy but the sense in this context seems not so on point)."

Here is an example of usage for instance, from the assault of the French on the Italian city of Brescia in 1512:

When, for neglect and cowardice of the Stradiots, the cavalry of Sir d’Allegri entered the gate of St. Nazaro, Ludovico was called for assistance, who wasn’t slow willing to block the way to the French, that bloody were going straight to the square, to catch in the middle those who were fighting in the little square of the Albara with Sir di Foix. He opposed himself near the canton of the Stoppini, and during the first encounter he threw Allegri to the ground, but being him hit by many French spears (note: or lances, this is according to the nature of the soldiers, if knights or footsmen), which wanted to defend their captain with full impetus, he fell dead and trampled. The bitter news came to Lorenzo, and in the same moment came the crowd of the enemies too, of those entered through St. Nazaro gate, as well as of those who, overcome every difficulty, had come down from the castle. Eager to collect the price of the Homeland loss, and of brother’s death, he put himself with a greatsword in hand performing admirably in the bigger crowd of the enemies’ fight that little by little, closing him in the middle of the square, had surrounded him on all sides. Sir di Fois, amazed to see so much valor in a man, who had made all around a dreadful trench of human corpses, took off his iron glove two times, and two times he raised the hand, and the visor, shouting to surrender, and ordering to his own to stop fighting him.

Or a case of riot defense:

The captain of justice arrived to the middle of the court of the Palace with a soldier of the guard of the first gate who let him in who, with a two handed sword which he was bringing, was trying to hold them back and to ask them what they wanted."

And finally in the skirmishes of the Pavia Campaign of 1525:

"[…] it seemed legit to Pescara to get out of Lodi, and to annoy, to undermine and to persecute the French in everything with some two handed sword, among others, many times he gave troubles to the Dondossola mountaineer soldiers lead by Paolo della Selva for the French: and this under suggestion of all the captains, and of the viceroy, and of Morone, the Duke's deputy, as well […]"

[Bare Mettle]

Interesting stuff. These kind of accounts certainly support the various claims of these weapons being used to hold a position against many. I also agree that their use as pike felling weapons is dubious at best.

Historical context tells us a lot, but there is also a lot we simply do not know, which is important to remember. We don't really know what the intent behind many weapon design features was, but we can find our own practical reasons for them. If something can be used in a certain way, then someone probably did, and that's more than enough in our context.

The context of the game is not historical, we don't need to represent what was done historically and what wasn't. The game quite specifically aims to explore the possibilities of a plausible, but distinctly fantasy, world. The weapons may be very similar, but the context is very different. It's more relevant to consider what we can infer from the characteristics of something rather than adhering to restrictions imposed by spotty historical evidence. If something makes sense, it makes sense, you can't go wrong with that here.


As for the whole greatswords are OP thing, I'm quite sceptical. My impression from our discord is that experienced arena players prefer polearms, with greatswords not being a popular choice at all. Really though, once you've mastered it, every weapon is "OP". Swords in general are the easiest to get comfortable with because they're fast and responsive, but they are clearly vastly inferior at delivering damage where armour is involved. I think the balance will shift even more towards polearms with the changes we're working on.

Ultimately though a weapon is a weapon, they don't magically become useless due to historical context or whatever. Once you learn to consistently outmanoeuvre an AI opponent you'll win whether it takes you 2 attacks or 10. This is mostly an issue with the AI being too predictable once you get used to their patterns, which is something we're looking to address.

[Konrax]

I'm really curious to see how it plays out in multiplayer for the above mentioned reasons, when the AI becomes predictable enough it's easy to gravitate to weapons that will do significantly more damage since the speed and reach of swords no longer becomes as important.

Please Bare Mettle don't forget some of my wish list combat items I posted a few months back about anchoring your stance in combat, shoves, and attacking while running during your combat improvements.

Lastly do you have any comments on my statement about double edged weapons maybe getting a remise speed buff? (or a different animation?)

[chiconspiracy]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Konrax_tv:

I'm really curious to see how it plays out in multiplayer for the above mentioned reasons, when the AI becomes predictable enough it's easy to gravitate to weapons that will do significantly more damage since the speed and reach of swords no longer becomes as important.

Please Bare Mettle don't forget some of my wish list combat items I posted a few months back about anchoring your stance in combat, shoves, and attacking while running during your combat improvements.

Lastly do you have any comments on my statement about double edged weapons maybe getting a remise speed buff? (or a different animation?)

If polearms can get a massive thrust and recovery speed buff... that's one of the reasons the greatsword is op, even the smaller polearms thrust and recover like they are moving through molasses, while the greatsword can complete TWO swing attacks in the same time.

[Konrax]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από chiconspiracy:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Konrax_tv:

I'm really curious to see how it plays out in multiplayer for the above mentioned reasons, when the AI becomes predictable enough it's easy to gravitate to weapons that will do significantly more damage since the speed and reach of swords no longer becomes as important.

Please Bare Mettle don't forget some of my wish list combat items I posted a few months back about anchoring your stance in combat, shoves, and attacking while running during your combat improvements.

Lastly do you have any comments on my statement about double edged weapons maybe getting a remise speed buff? (or a different animation?)

If polearms can get a massive thrust and recovery speed buff... that's one of the reasons the greatsword is op, even the smaller polearms thrust and recover like they are moving through molasses, while the greatsword can complete TWO swing attacks in the same time.

Most polearms have spikes on the other side of the head so they would be considered double edged weapons for the purpose of my statement (my original post said this as well). I think polearms should have faster thrusts as well because of the grip used on the weapons, where they should have a thrust disadvantage is on the overall length of the stabs reach compared to swords for this reason (2h only).

[Malice]

When it comes to swords, I'd say they yes shouldn't be useless against armored opponents for the sake of fairness. Though even though it's been awhile since iv'e spoken in this thread, I'd say I still support my original message only because the weakness of the blade even if it was unrealistically heavy, the blade would disperse the overall impact poorly when it comes to the damage potential.

when full plate armor was first made for a template knight, they ingraved his armor with a symbol meaning "Invincible", mostly bc he was facing enemy's using simple swords and bored in the 13th century.

The European swords you speak of are potentially good only in the right hands, currently the game is already far more superior to me than most triple A games, though I think it would be cool if it you'd consider adding a warpick or maybe even warscythe, the warpick would make more sense though. They are renown for there pin pointed damage potential.

The last thing id like to mention is that there's a long sword technique called half swording, it uses the weight of the sword mixed with the crushing pin pointed force of the pomel/guard making for an incredibly effecient welder against armour, even 15th century full plate, those that made the technique call it a murder strike.

Thank you for taking the time to speak with me and feel free to continue the conversation, I love medieval talk and learning what you could tell me.

[Solinarius☕]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Malice:

The last thing id like to mention is that there's a long sword technique called half swording, it uses the weight of the sword mixed with the crushing pin pointed force of the pomel/guard making for an incredibly effecient welder agianst armour, even 15th century full plate, those that made the technique call or a murder strike.

I believe half-swording was used for precise thrusts and wrestling. Mordhau was for blunt trauma. Anyways, I hope BM will find such techniques as half-swording and mordhau useful for further distinguishing weapons from one another and shifting the balance for the better. Revisions for stamina (significant hit required to KO) and parries (able to hit or push weapons aside with sheer force), as well as features like hooking and pulling (for tripping, controlling weapons, or point-blank wrestling) could facilitate the desirability of such techniques.