Chivarly Medieval Warfare - October 16th

[Destraex]

Raied. I have been watching mordhau. But honestly don't think it will be realistic enough.
Also if the forum community is anything to go by it will be a very immature player base.

I have been posting asking about the armour damage model and have been getting answers that
are along the lines of "we want fun, why would we want realism, you have to have balance". It looks like swords will go through armour like it was cloth and also that their will probably be no location damage for aiming at arm pits or other armour types.

It always annoys me when games give in to balance by means of destroying accuracy when they can balance in so many other ways. Apparently though, complete player choice and fantasy is fun. Slash away like drunken idiots with massive one size fits all slashes, cutting through plate with a butter knife. It's fine.

Besides I don't like a controller and chivalry and probably mordhau are built for xbox controllers. I liked War of the Rose's swing with the mouse, the harder and faster the stronger and then let go to strike and aim as you do so or before with the animation. I could let the strike go early for less damage but a faster shorter strike. I liked that you could adopt a stance with WOTR... chivalry always seemed to me like the mechanics controlled the game rather than you controlling the way you fought.

[Raied]

Destraex, I understand what you are saying and I kinda agree with you mostly, WOTR had my favorite melee mechanism, as you said realism was the key selling point, until they ruin it with imbalance.

For me chivalry was an ok melee game, I like to  fight in first person, at the beginning it was good for fun, and somehow encourages team play, what I look at those type of games is not only the details of fighting but the overall experience of team fight, siege and capturing the sword and shield era feeling, in chivalry after few months of release the exploiting of the mechanism starts to appear, the fight start looking ridiculous, the developers worked in balancing this and reduce the lol spins and excessive dragging, but the childish community start crying stating that those changes reduces the skill level etc.. from there the game went downhill to become shit fantasy derpy FPS...

However, It had a decent starts, that where I have faith Mordhau, they continue where chivalry should evolve to, right era armors, weapons and effect of the opponent etc.. I am sure the realism is far away from WOTR, but there are some of it there, adding cavalry is great thing for me as well. Yes I agree with you there are a lot of people on the forum and kickstarter page trying to kill the realism and drag the game to be "fun" and has a lot of lel moments, now it is up to the developer on how the game shall be shaped, and I hope they wont ruine it, I will give this system one more chance.

For the controller, yes chivalry control was designed more to suite console controller, but for what I see mordhau will have more swings directions, but again I hope they focus on mouse and keyboard in furthur development, and completely remove the idea of console release, I still prefer WOTR/M&B control system, you have more control of your character swing as you mentioned, but I dont mind much the mordhau/ chivalry system especially in first person view.

Unfortunately, there are no much melee games in the market, WOTR/V died, M&B aged and still waiting for Bannerlord, I am like many others having the itch to play, and just like I much prefer to have high realism in those games...

[Toonces]

Chivalry never clicked with me.  I'd say Chivalry is to medieval combat what Left4Dead2 is to zombie killing.  Both are fun on a Friday night with a few scotches in you, but don't expect a deep experience.

WotR was fantastic, but the devs killed it with the pay model.

I went early access on Of Kings and Men, and it was shaping up to be awesome, but then the devs dumped it before it was finished and now it's dead.

So, no, I won't be kickstarting or going early access on the next best thing.  I'll just wait for release, and for the reviews to come in.  Meantime, Mount and Blade is a fine game.

I take it back- I'd go early access on Mount and Blade 2 because I have faith the devs will finish it.  Kings and Men really pisses me off; it was not cheap.

[Raied]

Chivalry never clicked with me.  I'd say Chivalry is to medieval combat what Left4Dead2 is to zombie killing.  Both are fun on a Friday night with a few scotches in you, but don't expect a deep experience.

WotR was fantastic, but the devs killed it with the pay model.

I went early access on Of Kings and Men, and it was shaping up to be awesome, but then the devs dumped it before it was finished and now it's dead.

So, no, I won't be kickstarting or going early access on the next best thing.  I'll just wait for release, and for the reviews to come in.  Meantime, Mount and Blade is a fine game.

I take it back- I'd go early access on Mount and Blade 2 because I have faith the devs will finish it.  Kings and Men really pisses me off; it was not cheap.

Oh yeah I totally forgot about of kings and men, I was following it since it was called melee: battleground, and bought the early access immediately to support the developers... well I had really high hope for the game, it was unexpected that most of the team members leave and abandon the game before even release the main features, that really pissed me off, so I decided to forget about the game.