A/B Melee test results for 1H Sword vs 2H Weapons

Well, I don't know what to say about this test.

Initial checks indicate that the attack cone of the initial attack of both the 2H Axe and the 1H sword are greater than 180 degrees. Eyeballing indicates that subsequent attacks may approach the 200 degrees mark. Addendum: Spear and Staff actually do have the 360 degree attack, but the range for that is shorter in the back than in the front. It's hard to describe this, but I know some people who are gonna be really happy to hear that. It's not terribly short, just shorter than in front. 2H Sword is about 270-ish and Axe seem to have it too, if you can get close enough to the enemy, but this is probably not meaningful, all it means is that you can fight one NPC close behind you in PvE while still attacking those in front.

So, that eliminates the idea of dodging these meaningfully.

Movement speed is not affected by any of these weapons while attacking.

Since my concerns are mostly about balance and 'implementing this for no reason other than general illusion', I can't even say anything.

Result of test therefore summarized, at THIS time as:

"Mu - the question is wrong."

Edit: (Primary post complete now, no more updates to this one.)

Well, the good news for those of us who hate the split body animations is that the current build means you never have to actually use them. If you aren't moving, the rooted animations play, without the forward lunge, and since you don't actually have any good reasons to move while swinging (just use a spear and others can't outrange you), the shift is never necessary.

I agree that this is going to lead to 'essentially Tab Target' gameplay, especially PvE, but a game that is asking 250+ hours of PvE for max level can't afford to have unengaging PvE, which means we should see 'decent mobs with time-reactionary mechanics', I hope.

We have not received permission from Denahi to share the quoted post.

The problem is that achieving a critical mass of players that actually understand all of the parts of this, and won't just go 'I like moving, so split body is better', takes a long time, and a lot of 'things going wrong to make those players annoyed'. That's why I don't like the test.

We've had lots of really long discussions on these things, so I understand your hope, but you have to be careful not to end up sounding like those who oppose your goals, too. If you just say 'I want things to be more realistic and fluid', or 'I want better animations', then it's the same as people who go 'I like the animations now', 'I really like the fluidity of being able to move'.

I know you've said more things than that. I keep track of them. But for now, there's not much we can do.

We have not received permission from Happymeal2415 to share the quoted post.

Case in point. I'm not really saying Happymeal is wrong, or wrong to give this opinion, it's just the way things are when people disagree on something like this.

On the other hand, if just going 'I don't like how the animations look and therefore combat is less engaging' is a feedback type that gets factored into long term design, I have... other concerns.

Well, since the obvious 'assumption' for 'if PvP combat is going to be meaningful at all' here is 'the cones aren't part of the test, they will be changed later in development', might as well get started on the feedback concepts for that.

What is an acceptable maximum attack cone? Not 'range', and don't need to think about 'balancing range vs arc', at least not yet.

Unless the game becomes really heavily cooldown/ability based (it certainly could), then the widest attack arc weapon has the advantage in most melee relative to anything else .

Personally I feel that past 120 degrees starts to mess with the game (turns it into chase and gap-closing), before you even talk about skill requirements. So, for the first basic attack in a chain (since any combo system would open up other things) what's the arc people expect?