A point on bayonets and shortswords/saber-briquets

[Gokiller]

Spoiler

It's a game that got shit when they turned away attention from the melee, that was perfect in MM, to favor fancy uniforms and drum-musiv over it.

But fine. Utterly destroy the gameplay when we finally made it playable.

Who exactly is "we"?

How silly to assume elitism.

The collective work, discussing and empirism of the community, in relation to the devs, has benefited us with a working melee system to date, ofcourse.

[close]

Appologies, seeing it came from you. I expected a slightly different answer. But alrighty. 

[Allasaphore]

To be fair, I think the bayonet speed is more to balance the game than anything else. In reality you wouldn't have to stab someone 4+ times with a bayonet to incapacitate them either, so the point is that balance takes the lead with realism in the background, especially for functional parts of the game. And yes, sabre briquets should deal more damage, especially if a blow to the face is inflicted.

[Coconut]

"Realism" lulz you ask for too much.

[KillerMongoose]

Asking for the saber briquet to not be useless and to kill somebody when you bash their skull in is not too much

[Coconut]

Asking for the saber briquet to not be useless and to kill somebody when you bash their skull in is not too much

If the sabre briquet was powerful enough to give an actual advantage to using it over the bayoneted musket then the devs would remove it instantly in a patch. Remember how the devs removed the baker rifle because it gave an unfair advantage to the 95th over the other nations skirmishers?

This would be the same as it would give unfair disadvantages to nations with infantry that do not have sabre briquets, ex. UK infantry. It would look stupid if two lines charged each other say a prussian friekorp line and the french legion de vistule and both lines pull out their butter knives.

Bayoneted Muskets should be more powerful, skirmishers are supposed to be vulnerable to melee charges because they are a support unit for firing at distances and are meant to be slaughtered by infantry is close combat even if the skirms use their butter knives

[KillerMongoose]

I didn't say the saber briquets should be better than bayonets I said that they should at least not be useless and that they should still be lethal when you cut somebody's face in half. And a note about the MM baker rifle, it was most definitely not overpowered because it had less accuracy that unbayoneted rifles, but that's an unrelated topic.

[Duuring]

Well, they aren't useless. They are pretty handy in indoorfighting, but if we want the sabre-briquet to be as effective in RL, we have to change all sabres/swords - A single stab with one of those would easily kill you.

[Modig]

What'cho talkin aboot? The butterspoons are awesome!

[Walko]

I understand that but I feel the point about shortswords is still valid, as it stands they are useless dead weights and illogically weak.

Isn't that what they were in real life? I have read countless times that the short swords were only used for camp duties and such, and were really just for decoration. Remember this is napoleonic europe, practicality is not at the top of the list for most armies. 

[Dionysus]

The fact that heavy cavalry sabers and officer swords have similar if not the exact same feinting speed as saber briquets, shows just how intelligent and hard working the devs are. (Total sarcasm they are lazy and stupid).

[Maroon]

Completely agree on the butterknife part. I've tried it a while back with some regimental mates, and on average, it took 4-5 hits to the body and head to kill someone, against a 4/5 1 hit kill of the bayonet. Pulling out my stats yet again, the sabre briquet and it's equals boast 22 cut, and 20 pierce damage. Combined with a lowish speed of 95 and a very meagre length of 65-77, that ends up doing very low damage. I'd suggest buffing the sabres to 27c and 25p or something, that would decrease the amount of hits needed by 1 or 2.

Also, as a remark to Dionysus' latest post, the officer's sword is just as fast as the briquet (95), and the heavy cav sword is slower (91, which might not look as much slower, but it really shows in melee). The butterknife's speed could be higher, yes, but the other swords are fine as they are.

[Dionysus]

Completely agree on the butterknife part. I've tried it a while back with some regimental mates, and on average, it took 4-5 hits to the body and head to kill someone, against a 4/5 1 hit kill of the bayonet. Pulling out my stats yet again, the sabre briquet and it's equals boast 22 cut, and 20 pierce damage. Combined with a lowish speed of 95 and a very meagre length of 65-77, that ends up doing very low damage. I'd suggest buffing the sabres to 27c and 25p or something, that would decrease the amount of hits needed by 1 or 2.

Also, as a remark to Dionysus' latest post, the officer's sword is just as fast as the briquet (95), and the heavy cav sword is slower (91, which might not look as much slower, but it really shows in melee). The butterknife's speed could be higher, yes, but the other swords are fine as they are.

Nope. Totally wrong. The swords are not fine as they are they are completely unbalanced. Most people just don't know how to use them. You can feint attacks TO fast with swords, I can understand the briquet that fast because its tiny and does barely any damage. But officer swords and cavalry swords should be slowed the fuck down. You try moving a 20-40 pound mostly steel weapon like that without hurting yourself.

This is the one part of the game I find ridiculously stupid. Obviously they have no intent on changing it because they think its balanced.

The fact is they have slowed down the bayonet and basically kept swords the same speed. Its not balanced.

[Maroon]

You try moving a 20-40 pound mostly steel weapon like that without hurting yourself.

20-40 pound

Wha? How is a sword 20-40 pounds? The really heavy ones might get up to 15 pounds, but no more than that. A good swordsman can use a sword like that at that speed, or even quicker. That is completely ignoring the fact that swords would be immensly useless if they were slowed down.

[Riddlez]

Have people ever hear of. 'getting inside'?

No, not that.

In fighting.


Fighting against a polearm or a greatsword, would be very dangerous, and, when skillfully fought, nearly impossble to casually defeat.
But, you could kill a knight wielding a greatsword with a knife, if you could get into the effective range of the weapon.

This is not hard to implement in M&B, is it?
Step inside the effective range of the bayonet, and you can kill with a sword bayo.

[KillerMongoose]

Okay just to clarify, no sword in the Napoleonic wars ever weighed anywhere close to 20-40 or even 15 pounds. Cavalry sabers were, on average, 2-3 pounds and 3 pounds is pushing it. While I think the officers saber is fine because its paper thin and balanced, I understand with the cavalry sabers because they are unbalanced, with most of the weight at the end. But if swords were slowed down it would only be fair (and realistic) to make them more powerful,  after all,  these sabers split helmets, severed limbs, and "clove heads asunder to the chin."

And I understand that briquets were not used often but its still a thick, heavy blade that could easily kill a man with a thrust or a slash to the face. If you look at how much a saber briquet weighs in real life, its roughly 2.5 pounds which is equal to the weight of a French cavalry saber. That kind of weight would split a face open to the brain. The reason these things weren't used in combat is because the bayonet was just more handy because you kept your musket with you instead of leaving it behind or carrying it on a shoulder strap. The briquets weren't useless, soldiers just liked to have their guns with them. Also sword bayonets were used and they were meant to be deadly slash-and-stabbers, there's no excuse for these to be so wimpy. They're bayonets too, just detached. The point that is indisputable is that a thrust only requires 2-4 inches to be lethal. So if I shove 12 inches of steel all the way into someone's chest, are the odds in their favor? No. The reason M&B's combat is so successful is because it's realistic and therefore skill-based and therefore competitive. Nobody likes trashing an opponent then dying with 1 hit because "lol sword bayo sux"