Executions?

[arcticpulse]

I fail to understand why such 'fancy', if that's the right word, executions are used in this game. I don't see a point besides it 'looking cool' to some people. I personally think it's a pointless feature that detracts from an otherwise good looking game. Not only are the executions long in execution (tee hee, pun intended), they seem to want to humiliate the enemy. I really don't see the point of this. Mount and blade didn't need such gimmicks to make it a great game. The execution problem along with this thread (http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...tter-than-this.), seems to indicate a desire to cater to the call of duty audience. That is, looks before authenticity among a myriad of problems including a poor quality story for the single player and unnecessary violence put in 'for the sake of it'. I hope I do not offend the developers, or anyone really, as that is certainly not my intention. I am just wondering why there is just a radical diversion from the tradition gritty semblance of realism paradox seems to want to deliver.

Will the multiplayer have a map with towns and villages on it?
"As it is envisioned now, the game revolves mainly around the part where you hack peoples heads off." (Pretty sure that means no.)

I think the above further illustrates my point. Towns and villages could add a strategic element to the game, like controlled towns giving revenue to buy gear or being able to build fortifications. Perhaps even spies could be added to incite revolts that make taking over a village easier.

[Henk.]

First of all I'd add that chances are that executions will be able to be disabled through server side option but yes, executions are mainly for the team deathmatch playing, stat grinding lmb-spamming noobs I hope to slaughter whenever they find themselves in a battle server (whenever such a gamemode gets released, mind that.) I share your fear though, that too much emphasis will be put on satisfying the call of duty type of players whilst leaving the more - how shall I put it - warband-favoring players on second note..

Anyways answering your question about the maps, there'll be towns, villages, castles, forest maps, open plains and all that good stuff so I wouldn't worry about that. Your ideas about spies and revenue and such are probably more suited for a mod than the actual game.

[ProjectAngel]

I think it's important to point out that not everyone will end up in the incapacitated state where they can be excecuted or revived, (there will be insta-kills.) Also there hasn't been anything said on whether you will have to use the excecute move or if you will just be able to continue attacking the downed opponent normally to finish them off, (I should imagine you will be able to... Wouldn't make sense if you couldn't lol.)

Personally I think excecutions / revives will be nice little features.

As for the game having a map with towns on it, eventually somewhere down the line I agree that would make a pretty awesome addition, although for now I would prefer it if the devs spent their time getting the combat system perfected. It would be no good having lots of territories to fight over if the core game just wasn't up to scratch.

Not only are the executions long in execution (tee hee, pun intended)

I lol'd.

Anyways answering your question about the maps, there'll be towns, villages, castles, forest maps, open plains and all that good stuff so I wouldn't worry about that. Your ideas about spies and revenue and such are probably more suited for a mod than the actual game.

Pretty sure means like a World map with territories on it that can be captured and held via way of battles on the actual game maps. (Thats the kind of map the question he quoted from the FAQ is refering to.)

[Kamikazuh]

I think it's important to point out that not everyone will end up in the incapacitated state where they can be excecuted or revived, (there will be insta-kills.)

Is there any info on how big chance is there to go in incapacitated state? I hope it's not very high, more like "Woo! I didn't die! Maybe someone can save me still!". So it would happen relatively rarely. Like 20% of times you die, you would go to incapacitated state. And the other 80% would be just insta-kills. As the wound would have to be pretty minor for you to be revived in the field, with medieval methods. Like an arrow in somewhere (But not in knee, mind you. When that happens you just have to stop being an adventurer.) or some not fatal wound.

[ProjectAngel]

Is there any info on how big chance is there to go in incapacitated state? I hope it's not very high, more like "Woo! I didn't die! Maybe someone can save me still!". So it would happen relatively rarely. Like 20% of times you die, you would go to incapacitated state. And the other 80% would be just insta-kills. As the wound would have to be pretty minor for you to be revived in the field, with medieval methods. Like an arrow in somewhere (But not in knee, mind you. When that happens you just have to stop being an adventurer.) or some not fatal wound.

I've not read anything myself regarding the chances of you entering this incapacitated state but I hope it isn't too often.

I would imagine, (so don't quote me on this lol,) that if you get headshotted, you will instantly die. If you get couched lance, you will instantly die. As for melee, well I have no idea to be fair, but I would think that if you take an axe to the face then there shouldn't be much chance of you getting back to your feet.

Hows that cover art that you promised me coming along ? I want a Lancaster one that I can print off.

[Kamikazuh]

Ah, alrighty.

I said maybe! Currently I'm stuck between client work and school, so don't have time for that right now. But I'll be drawing knights, so I can propably do that at some point!

[ZechsMerquise73]

Watching the video, I was really put off by the guy wearing no armor being repeatedly stabbed in the eyes and throat by the tiny dagger. What could possibly be the point of that? I could understand if it were a fully armored opponent, getting into the slits of the armor.. But what was show in the video was just stupid.

[Kator Viridian]

Watching the video, I was really put off by the guy wearing no armor being repeatedly stabbed in the eyes and throat by the tiny dagger. What could possibly be the point of that? I could understand if it were a fully armored opponent, getting into the slits of the armor.. But what was show in the video was just stupid.

There was a picture somewhere of a skull with multiple lacerations and hits taken to it;



Both before and after death (As suzerain said http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/...8-Rate-of-gore).

The finishing move also adds a bit of fun to the gameplay, makes it a bit more enjoyable to watch, also makes sense really if you have the opertunity to stab your foe multiple times in the face you would, its life and death, the quicker he (or she) dies the less likely you are to on the battlefield from someone else, if this means more stabs to quicken it so be it.

Personally I'd rather see more than one stab, its what the weapon is designed for, stabbing, armoured or not ... the game may take it OTT for some people and some people are not bothered by it at all, I personally am not bothered, more variety would be great like what BF3 does with its back stabbing (depending on the angle depends on the stab).

[ZechsMerquise73]

The execution in the video shows someone being stabbed in the throat, eyes, and cheeks. There's wanting the opponent to die, and then there's stabbing them in arbitrary places which wouln't kill them as quickly as hitting them in the jugular, heart, etc. The weapon itself looks like it's made for getting in the cracks of armor (though I'm no expert in medieval arms), not for jumping on a guy who's dressed as a jester.

How does forcing the player into a cutscene improve the gameplay? In Gears of War, it just meant someone would be standing behind you, waiting to do it to you, too.

[ProjectAngel]

How does forcing the player into a cutscene improve the gameplay? In Gears of War, it just meant someone would be standing behind you, waiting to do it to you, too.

The incapacitated / revive features do add to the gameplay. (Saving your friend suddenly becomes the main objective in a battle, forcing you to defend their body until you have enough support and time to get them back into the fight.)

The excecutions / revives are interuptable so it's not like people would sit and wait until you finished their friend off before they attack you.

Also, the game will have insta-death attacks meaning that not everyone will even enter this incapacitated state. Oh, and there has been no word yet on if we will just be able to use normal attacks to finish an incapacitated enemy off so theres a chance you might never have to even use the excecution move.

[Kator Viridian]

The execution in the video shows someone being stabbed in the throat, eyes, and cheeks. There's wanting the opponent to die, and then there's stabbing them in arbitrary places which wouln't kill them as quickly as hitting them in the jugular, heart, etc. The weapon itself looks like it's made for getting in the cracks of armor (though I'm no expert in medieval arms), not for jumping on a guy who's dressed as a jester.

How does forcing the player into a cutscene improve the gameplay? In Gears of War, it just meant someone would be standing behind you, waiting to do it to you, too.

Watched the video about 5-6 times to make sure I got this right, the 3 hits consist of 2 quick jabs to the eye and neck, 2 pretty decent spots to kill a man if aiming for his face and upper torso, the neck consisting of major arteries, windpipe and spinal column, the eye is a good place for getting towards the brain but probably not reaching it unless it went all the way through like poor Jory here; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7L8ByreRfUo ... I know game of thrones not the ideal thing for medical or historical accuracy but enough force you could jam a knife through someones head (probably not on the first go and getting through the back of the skull or spinal column may prove challenging even on the second attempt) ... the final dramatic blow is done into the eye socket a second time (totalling 3 blows) ... dosn't seem stupid or unnessary to me, I mean afterall the man your jabbing wants you dead as much as him and all the blows in the finishing move seem to have purpose.

The dagger in the video can vary really from reality, I've seen a few that are no more than sticks of metal with a handle and pointy end, no blade for cutting as the point was just the pierce through chainmail or such for a finishing move or you would lift someones visor and jab it in their face as you kneel astride them (much like the video).

As for the jester reference, the teams have to have some distinguishing features otherwise you'd be hacking everyone to bits, that comes in the form of colours ... a orange/red and green team and a Blue and white team, the way they've done it may look silly to you but it makes perfect sense in the terms of gameplay, warband had banners above peoples heads and war of the roses has the 2 colour systems.

p.s. and those who like game of thrones and warband heres something that may make you giggle; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3PeNGsuAr8