I haven't played MBII consistently for 3 years, here's why.

SeV

Nerd
Internal Beta Team
Posts
1,166
Likes
2,138
My point is that the feedback I was given, by devs and beta testers, was that 1.4.5 sabering was an improvement to 1.4.4. That's why it was released. As a lead I need to recognise that I have to rely on other people's opinions on deciding things that I'm not best placed to have an opinion on - and I'm not a saberist. That's what I did, I trusted the feedback, including yours, in the feedback threads.

Leads cannot be aware of every single issue/bug on on-going developments. We have to rely on devs to develop and test their stuff until it's bug-free (as far as can be detected), and beta testers to provide feedback on what was tested, and then act on that feedback and their own judgement. As an example, I still I had concerns with 1.4.5 testing before release which is why I pulled Aaron and SK5 on a beta server and asked them to duel, then tweaked according to their feedback.



The beta test threads are all available in the beta subforum. Look at the test agendas prior to 1.4.5. Count again.



Because it wasn't ready. There were no bug-free consecutive beta tests of a stable build for a second open beta. Nor was only picking the changes that were working possible, since the whole huge amount of work was on the same branch.



Different devs work on different things. Tempest worked on sabering, he didn't look into the FA changes at all, so your argument that one is somehow prioritised over the other is invalid. Both can happen in parallel.



No, the three(!) tests we had prior to 1.4.5 were not the QA I wanted. But it was enough to convince me I was releasing something better than 1.4.4 in terms of sabering, based on feedback and the options I had at the time (which was to release those sabering changes, or release no sabering changes and no fixes at all - 1.4.5 could not be delayed).




We were aware of this. The ability to run Open Betas easily through the Launcher is something that has long been in the pipeline. As for running Open Betas manually, we could still do that (even with the limited participation), but we didn't get to the point where we said 'ok, we have code suitable for open beta as it is now'.



See, we agree on something.



You called me by name in your initial post, and then proceeded to accuse me of releasing bad patches. I am responding to your comments. But you're right, the rest on PMs (discord).

I don't have a bone to pick with you at all. I just think the dev process has been terrible and been producing terrible patches. The question is not whether 1.4.5 is a better patch than 1.4.4, that's pretty much settled and I think everyone can agree that it's better. Whether you released it and was responsible for a bad patch or someone else is not the point of this thread at all. I said that at the beginning, that I don't want to play the blame game because it is unproductive. Imagine if you spent your energy on making up open mode changes and adjustments and those giant walls of accusatory text contained actual valuable info that we could use to better MB2. Wouldn't that be great? This thread is about the future of MBII and what I think, my post contained like 1 sentence about you specifically and I even edited in a comment later.

I don't know what else you got for me that you need to PM, but I feel entirely unensnared by whatever it is that has caught you and made you go into a defensive frenzy, I just want to say what I think and hopefully prompt some positive changes.

I know you're not saberist, so talk about open mode instead. You play mando alot, what do you think about reintroducing proj rifle? Are there other gimmicks we can give it like grappling hook? We can improve the game together if we stop all this stupidity. I called out the process for being bad because I believe it to be bad, inefficient and producing mediocre at best patches. What is the point of spending years of work when 1.3 is more fun to play? Or V0 or RC1 or RC3P3 or B17? We need to focus and improve the game, not spend all the time with trivial, unimportant things that do not improve the game. This thread was a criticism thread not a praise thread. There is alot of praise and good that has come out of the dev process aswell both in dueling, in open and in general in terms of models and maps and stuff so it's not all bad. I just want the game to be better and for it to be better we need a better dev process, evidently.

What we don't need is more drama in MB2, we got enough as it is and we should be able to speak our minds without going insane. I know I'm sometimes a bit harsh but I am paying you the highest compliment when I am honest with you instead of trying to coddle your feelings.

I'm glad the open beta stuff is on the table and I'm really looking forward to the progress that that will hopefully bring.
 

eezstreet

Movie Battles II Team Retired
Posts
242
Likes
299
Really nice and thought out commentary. I do have to admit that I tuned out half-way through the sabering. Shit just got far too complicated. That's the system's biggest problem first and foremost. That's what I'd set out to fix, but nobody vocally agrees with me so I think I'm in the wrong there and everyone else knows better.

I won't say anything about the dueling ideas or anything. This is roughly where we should be with our system, just a bit faster paced:
Attacks need to have impact and weight to them. The receiver currently does not react for shit. Poor timings are punished through random RPG numbers rather than visual turn exchanges like in most notable fighting games such as Tekken.
Ironically most of SJE is just copy-pasted from OJP Enhanced which is where I believe MB2's sabering came from originally, no?

I really did not have time to read most of these posts, I just want to comment that I generally avoid sabers and dealing with sabers because they are overly complicated. If I see too many enemies on the other team going for Sith, I go Wookiee and slap the sithspit out of them. If I see too many enemies going for Jedi, I go SBD and slap the sithspit out of them. I'm a very simple man, as you can see. I'll take it from SeV because I've seen him play a lot. But you are right though, about every point here.
 

Eazy E

Banned
Posts
293
Likes
460
Ironically most of SJE is just copy-pasted from OJP Enhanced which is where I believe MB2's sabering came from originally, no?
I'm pretty sure it is. I remember in one of the old patches (not sure which one) there was a note in the readme giving thanks to the OJP team.
 
Posts
280
Likes
250
There were some interesting things said by seV, I mainly played gunner up to know and I'm trying to get into jedis/sabering. And as someone more new I must disagree strongly with 1 point that seV brought up: boosting swingblock. From what I gathered swingblock should be a side-grade to a normal attack, if you do anything in real life anyone knows that hitting something hard leads to a greater effect but gives you less time to respond. And this is how I see things currently, you have the choice to be more offensive or by going lighter you can block incoming swing and still hit someone ( which is already quite crazy and a better alternative to the normal attack in most cases).

But saying that adding more button press should give more reward is silly, in that case crouching should be far better since you are holding the crouch button on top of other things ( it's only ok against horizontal swings in some cases and that is minimal considering the debuff it gives.) By the same logic faking swings should also be beneficial since you are pressing one more input and not committing totally to an attack.

That was my 2 cents on that part, maybe I'm just a silly noob though.
 
Posts
148
Likes
129
SeV gave you a complete sabersystem and necesarry changes to open mode - introduce it ffs. I can't even express how I support them, I really DO from the bottom of my heart.

From my side:

1. special attacks should cost fp, not bp indeed
2. bring back purple stab, give current purple kata move to the red style, red style should have flinch or it should be faster, no staggers
3. remove saber both perks&acm.
4. remove that crappy unreliable flinch thing, restore knockback
5. give more freedom by the force regen changes SeV mentioned - it will benefit both good gunner and good jedi/sith punishing bad ones
6. bring back grip to it's glory and don't f**** nerf lightning as you plan to.
7. why dont you allow avaiable force powers to be set in server confing? or at least introduce more powers. (you say: balh balh blah balance etc....)
8. There are plenty of unused FA assets which are great. Great maps, great possibilities. Some talented guys spent bunch of time on creating them and now everyone just plays dotf or lunarbase. You guys are really wasting the enormous potential the MB2 project has. This leads me to my last point:
9. why do you hardcode max skill points, timer etc.? Why do you impose us how we should play the game? (ok you're devs and I respect it but come on, MB2 can be so much more than this) I really want to set 30 minute rounds and play RP with my friends. I want them to join mid round, and be able to respawn, and use the all the classes. Just think of how many maps could be adapted to mb2 mode? Dozens, thousands. People would come and play, create their own star wars character and write their own history. Be a jedi/mandalorian/bounty hunter, whatever they want. What they have now is join the game, then learn and stay or get rekt and leave. Not everyone has the time and patience and will to do that.

Instead of nerfing the saber system and focusing on making the game noob friendly, give the noobs the possibility of playing as noobs in their own star wars universe, without the neccesity of constant reb vs imp fight.


I've seen this mod rise and fall, and rise again. I've been here since the very beginning, I've seen all the features over the years. Quiet, unseen, anonymous, until last year. I am willing to share my ideas, if only you wanted to listen.
 

Tempest

Gameplay Design
Movie Battles II Team
Posts
740
Likes
1,137
I was at work when all of this got posted initially (I did read through but I couldn't respond). After more discussions, general consensus (both as a result of this as well as stuff that's been in the background for a while) is leading to the following:
- Removal of flinch and restoration of knockback. Already done doing this.
- Removal of any "FP debuff"-esque mechanics. Already done doing this.
- No more super tank blocking saberists (goes with the above). Already done with this. Simplified it to a baseline of 25% reduction in FP damage while blocking. No further increase to those who are running. See one of my other posts elsewhere that explains all of the FP drain math.
- Putting the saber system back into a state similar to how it was prior/up to 1.3 (much simpler, no/non-universal ACM stuff, no perks; Just differing animations, attack/defense ratings). Currently working on this.

Kas said:
1. special attacks should cost fp, not bp indeed
I think that it's better balanced by a lower FP cost with a small BP cost (since it is basically a hyper-attack). This also lets it be balanced in cases such as someone spamming stabs with Duals when they're at low-0 BP and making it extremely difficult or impossible to finish them off.
2. bring back purple stab, give current purple kata move to the red style, red style should have flinch or it should be faster, no staggers
Just for reference, staggers and flinches are exactly the same thing (though most might think of flinching as where it just simply stops the swing like with how it works when you get shot while swingblocking). Less staggers of any sort = better. They're extremely intrusive and generally obnoxious to be on the receiving end of. Already tried Purple stab being back and it was horrible/a good reminder for why it got removed. Specials in beta are good examples of how they should be (providing some protection and decent damage as a baseline without being blenders).
3. remove saber both perks&acm.
Working on it!
4. remove that crappy unreliable flinch thing, restore knockback
5. give more freedom by the force regen changes SeV mentioned - it will benefit both good gunner and good jedi/sith punishing bad ones
Just need to look at the knockback code that's sitting around and make sure whatever cases of super launching people back don't come up again.
6. bring back grip to it's glory and don't f**** nerf lightning as you plan to.
The only bad thing that happened to grip was that it became a lot less cheese. It's actually stronger aside from that (though the timing on it could use tweaking, which is something I'm going to be looking at for my indepth run-through of tweaks to powers). Lightning is still cheese and needs a better baseline but in the long run will actually be stronger/more useful.
7. why dont you allow avaiable force powers to be set in server confing? or at least introduce more powers. (you say: balh balh blah balance etc....)
I don't know if it's ever been discussed but it's not something you can really just snap your fingers and have done. Not terribly difficult but it does require care to make sure nothing unintentional occurs (see the bugged 7 single saber style build I tend to use as a good example of what can happen..). More powers are in the same boat but also require things from scratch (and I do have some powers that I really want to put in!) as well.
8. There are plenty of unused FA assets which are great. Great maps, great possibilities. Some talented guys spent bunch of time on creating them and now everyone just plays dotf or lunarbase. You guys are really wasting the enormous potential the MB2 project has. This leads me to my last point:
People not playing the maps and whatnot aren't really something we can control without really stepping on toes and I doubt anyone on the team wants to delve into that territory. If the server owners don't want to play on maps, they don't have to. If servers are set up with RTV and people don't play on whatever maps, that's their choice.
9. why do you hardcode max skill points, timer etc.? Why do you impose us how we should play the game? (ok you're devs and I respect it but come on, MB2 can be so much more than this)
The way the points are set up are for balancing purposes. Having a streamlined expectation for Open mode needs some limitations.

I really want to set 30 minute rounds and play RP with my friends.
This is something that's come up on many occasions but I'd rather leave it to @Viserys or @Defiant to comment. Also as a side note, you can't really ever have truly unlimited rounds because of technical limitiations/issues that would arise.

I want them to join mid round, and be able to respawn, and use the all the classes.
Similar to the above but in regards to the actual requirements for allowing such things...it requires basically intentionally breaking through a lot of checks and code that try to prevent things from breaking. Just getting midround joining in duel mode was a huge headache (and there's still some buggy behavior that's not even something I can directly fix in the code I put together).

Just think of how many maps could be adapted to mb2 mode? Dozens, thousands. People would come and play, create their own star wars character and write their own history. Be a jedi/mandalorian/bounty hunter, whatever they want.
If you're referring to base JKA maps then a large majority of them aren't suited for MB2. FFA maps aren't suited for objective play.

What they have now is join the game, then learn and stay or get rekt and leave. Not everyone has the time and patience and will to do that.
That's more a personal issue than a game issue. If you aren't willing to put time into learning/improving at something, then why should you be getting the same results as someone who does?
 
Posts
141
Likes
120
Most of it is OK, however:

MBlock should cost BP. Disarming is bullshit and not a fun part of dueling, the better players were decided by their ability to drain opponents' BP to 0, not disarming and killing them whilst having less BP. It whould still be an option against those who get overconfident.
Running hits should do more damage. Not the other way around. It's the only way that makes sense. Running = momentum = more damage. It's risk vs reward, as you're vulnerable to slaps and getting hit yourself which obviously would drain more BP than if you were walking.
Swingblocks should do less damage. Again risk vs reward.
 

Stassin

Donator
Movie Battles II Team Retired
Posts
824
Likes
925
@SeV rereading i found there's something incorrect you've been saying: FP regen was not higher before, it's the opposite. The old FP regen was 1 FP per 200ms, since my changes it's 1 FP per 150ms.

Now, i think i can write the following list of needed core changes:

### Saber vs gun changes:
  • - Remove flinch.
  • - Remove FP regen debuffs when shot.
  • - Increase blocking FP drains and decrease non-blocking FP drains (actual values need to be found via testing for balance, but the difference between running drains and blocking drains should be around a 1.5x multiplier; in the old system it was around 1.3x).
  • - Keep the low FP drain cooldown (50ms) but reinstate a middle-ground from pre-v1.1 (where the FP drain cooldown was 200ms) by having all additional shots only drain about 0.5x FP during a window of 200ms after having been shot once (crucial to help jedi with 1vX in a system where blocking drains are not longer very low).
  • - Remove the able to autoblock/unable to autoblock saber differentiation for FP regen, having it regen at 100% all the time.

### Saber vs saber changes:
  • - Revert ACM to a similar state to pre-v1.1: fast styles start gaining ACM at 8 ACC, medium styles 6 ACC, strong styles 4 ACC. Each ACM point gives a 1.3x multiplier to all BP drains (so 1 ACM = 1.3x, 2 ACM = (1.3)^2, 3 ACM = (1.3)^3 etc., the max being 9 ACM = (1.3)^9 = 10.6 - for the record in the old system 9 ACM had a 12x multiplier and the progression was harsher like 1.5x, 3x etc.).
  • - ACC is strictly only gained (+1) and lost (-1) on bodyhits (first bodyhits of a chain only). Due to fast styles being different (blue is faster, cyan was FA-only) compared to the old system, they should have the single exception of losing 2 ACC when bodyhit by medium or strong styles.
  • - Remove all perks, meaning that the differences between styles in all situations should be only ever be the stance, AP, BP, HP dmg, swing animations & speeds, chaining differences (max swings in a chain and chaining direction restrictions), and ACM as described above. Nothing else, nothing tied to mblocks nor parries nor PBs nor semi-PBs nor NB nor force powers nor being knocked down or anything.
  • - Give Red style nudge. EDIT: on second thought, no. No perks. Red needs to be balanced via superior AP/BP values.
  • - Reintroduce old chaining direction restrictions (minimum of 3 quadrants for Red and Cyan, 2 quadrants for all other styles).
  • - Parries deal 20% of bodyhit damage, semi-PBs 50%, NBs 20% (if NB is introduced).
  • - Holding mouse 1 drains 4 BP per second, replacing current swing drains.
  • - Reduce overall BP regeneration and increase overall BP drains.

There are a few more changes worth considering for saber vs saber, as SeV has listed, and i have a few aswell to mix in, i'll make another list later (but these are less core and some probably more controversial so up for discussion i'd say).
 
Last edited:

Gargos

Donator
Movie Battles II Team
Posts
574
Likes
1,189
Wait I was always under impression that swingblocking did less dmg and running swings more? It must have been like this at some point or have I always been wrong?
 
Posts
141
Likes
120
Wait I was always under impression that swingblocking did less dmg and running swings more? It must have been like this at some point or have I always been wrong?
It was, when the system was good and shit actually made sense.
 
Posts
494
Likes
345
8hy56mP.png
 
Posts
280
Likes
250
Most of it is OK, however:

MBlock should cost BP. Disarming is bullshit and not a fun part of dueling, the better players were decided by their ability to drain opponents' BP to 0, not disarming and killing them whilst having less BP. It whould still be an option against those who get overconfident.
Running hits should do more damage. Not the other way around. It's the only way that makes sense. Running = momentum = more damage. It's risk vs reward, as you're vulnerable to slaps and getting hit yourself which obviously would drain more BP than if you were walking.
Swingblocks should do less damage. Again risk vs reward.
Running is momentum that is true but usually when you strike you do it with your whole body and need good grounding, anyone would tell you that in martial arts. Running around is better for evading hits and shots while walking or being stating require more commitment and should give more damage at the expense of mobility. Another way to balance would be to greatly increase recovery time on swing done while running, that would be a fair exchange for swinging while throwing yourself around.
 

Tempest

Gameplay Design
Movie Battles II Team
Posts
740
Likes
1,137
Technically, just the act of walking vs running is already winning in terms of damage in trades/in general (since walking/blocking gets X BP regenerating while the runner isn't getting any). This is why I wanted to experiment without any difference between the two in terms of damage. Running has the advantage of mobility, walking/blocking loses mobility for safety (e.g. regen, mblock, etc). Does there really need to be differing damages between the two (and further overloading swingblock more than it already is)?
 

SeV

Nerd
Internal Beta Team
Posts
1,166
Likes
2,138
@SeV rereading i found there's something incorrect you've been saying: FP regen was not higher before, it's the opposite. The old FP regen was 1 FP per 200ms, since my changes it's 1 FP per 150ms.

Now, i think i can write the following list of needed core changes:

### Saber vs gun changes:
  • - Remove flinch.
  • - Remove FP regen debuffs when shot.
  • - Increase blocking FP drains and decrease non-blocking FP drains (actual values need to be found via testing for balance, but the difference between running drains and blocking drains should be around a 1.5x multiplier; in the old system it was around 1.3x).
  • - Keep the low FP drain cooldown (50ms) but reinstate a middle-ground from pre-v1.1 (where the FP drain cooldown was 200ms) by having all additional shots only drain about 0.5x FP during a window of 200ms after having been shot once (crucial to help jedi with 1vX in a system where blocking drains are not longer very low).

### Saber vs saber changes:
  • - Revert ACM to a similar state to pre-v1.1: fast styles start gaining ACM at 8 ACC, medium styles 6 ACC, strong styles 4 ACC. Each ACM point gives a 1.3x multiplier to all BP drains (so 1 ACM = 1.3x, 2 ACM = (1.3)^2, 3 ACM = (1.3)^3 etc., the max being 9 ACM = (1.3)^9 = 10.6 - for the record in the old system 9 ACM had a 12x multiplier and the progression was harsher like 1.5x, 3x etc.).
  • - ACM is strictly only gained (+1) and lost (-1) on bodyhits (first bodyhits of a chain only). Due to fast styles being different (blue is faster, cyan was FA-only) compared to the old system, they should have the single exception of losing 2 ACC when bodyhit by medium or strong styles.
  • - Remove all perks, meaning that the differences between styles in all situations should be only ever be the stance, AP, BP, HP dmg, swing animations & speeds, chaining differences (max swings in a chain and chaining direction restrictions), and ACM as described above. Nothing else, nothing tied to mblocks nor parries nor PBs nor semi-PBs nor NB nor force powers nor being knocked down or anything.
  • - Give Red style nudge.
  • - Reintroduce old chaining direction restrictions (minimum of 3 quadrants for Red and Cyan, 2 quadrants for all other styles).
  • - Parries deal 20% of bodyhit damage, semi-PBs 50%, NBs 20% (if NB is introduced).
  • - Holding mouse 1 drains 4 BP per second, replacing current swing drains.
  • - Reduce overall BP regeneration and increase overall BP drains.

There are a few more changes worth considering for saber vs saber, as SeV has listed, and i have a few aswell to mix in, i'll make another list later (but these are less core and some probably more controversial so up for discussion i'd say).

Very noice indeed, mostly agree. I think swing restrictions should be locking close quadrants for sure. If that is what u mean by 2 quadrants then I'm good with that but I defo want same side diagonals to stay. Agree with the 3 for cyan and red. About the FP, isn't the FP regen you are referring to the 100% regen aka without saber active regen? And Active saber regen was 70% of that? In any case I am really happy that stuff is happening finally, after so long.

Technically, just the act of walking vs running is already winning in terms of damage in trades/in general (since walking/blocking gets X BP regenerating while the runner isn't getting any). This is why I wanted to experiment without any difference between the two in terms of damage. Running has the advantage of mobility, walking/blocking loses mobility for safety (e.g. regen, mblock, etc). Does there really need to be differing damages between the two (and further overloading swingblock more than it already is)?

It's an improvement over nonswingblocks doing more damage than swingblocks, but I think my suggested values are better. Holding walk is boring for a damage boost, swingblock is involved and happening all the time and it also takes skill. Holding a button down doesn't really take skill. Well atleast it's less interesting to me so I don't know why people are so opposed to boosting swingblocks over normal hits. It will help the better player so why not? And with regards to overloading I don't think its a big issue. It's not overloading the mechanic or overcomplicating the game to reward people for properly performing a mechanic they are already doing all the time anyways.

I think I explained my reasoning behind the changes fairly well, that runhits should be lower so its easier to chase running parrying opponents on low BP cus you will always come out on top in those exchanges instead of being halted in your tracks. Also would help alot with skill differentiation so that running flailers will deal alot less damage until they learn to play.

Though I think the swingblock vs nonswingblock is more important. This is because 90% of nonswingblocks are unintentional in high end dueling. So basically if nonswingblocks are stronger than swingblocks you're rewarding failers with higher damage. So that is why I was so vehemently against it being 1.1x vs 1.0x and why I prefer your running/walking distinction. I just think my numbers make more sense and will be better for the game.
 
Posts
280
Likes
250
Though I think the swingblock vs nonswingblock is more important. This is because 90% of nonswingblocks are unintentional in high end dueling. So basically if nonswingblocks are stronger than swingblocks you're rewarding failers with higher damage. So that is why I was so vehemently against it being 1.1x vs 1.0x and why I prefer your running/walking distinction. I just think my numbers make more sense and will be better for the game.
From what I read, it would seem that you think that normal attacks are stronger than swingblock and that swingblock should be upgraded to be on par with attack, which is ludicrous.

Sure I get that having someone deal slightly more damage to your meter because they failed an input sounds silly but from that failed input they also have drawbacks, otherwise no one would swingblock. Considering that most people already swingblock most of the time in open or duel, we can safely assume that it is superior due to the safety that it provide. Increasing the gap further is not the solution to me.
 

SeV

Nerd
Internal Beta Team
Posts
1,166
Likes
2,138
From what I read, it would seem that you think that normal attacks are stronger than swingblock and that swingblock should be upgraded to be on par with attack, which is ludicrous.

Sure I get that having someone deal slightly more damage to your meter because they failed an input sounds silly but from that failed input they also have drawbacks, otherwise no one would swingblock. Considering that most people already swingblock most of the time in open or duel, we can safely assume that it is superior due to the safety that it provide. Increasing the gap further is not the solution to me.

In the current patch swingblocks and nonswingblocks deal the same amount of damage, and holding walk increases your damage by 15%
I am arguing that the better swingblocker should be rewarded, and the way to reward them is to grant them a small damage boost so that when they swingblock entire combo's with their skeelz they get more damage out of it that someone who hasn't practiced so much. I don't really mind how it is currently except for the runhits maybe, I would like to see them reduced in power. I think saying my suggestion is ludicrious is a bit too much.

And from their failed input they don't really have a disadvantage as you said. Who is going to hit mblocks 3 or 4 swings into a combo? Only me and a few other top duelists maybe, and only if we know the opponents combos well enough to do that. I think that you mostly don't have any drawbacks when failing swingblock on those hits where a more skilled person would be swingblocking.
 

Stassin

Donator
Movie Battles II Team Retired
Posts
824
Likes
925
About the FP, isn't the FP regen you are referring to the 100% regen aka without saber active regen? And Active saber regen was 70% of that? In any case I am really happy that stuff is happening finally, after so long.
Lol, i actually forgot that i added that difference of regen between active saber and inactive saber. Then the regen should be 100% all the time i guess ?


About swingblocks dealing more dmg i'll have to disagree and at this point i doubt you'll find anyone who agrees. That's because swingblocks are thought of as "more careful swings" which is justified and intended since they both protect you against mblocks and reduce the BP damage you take when you get interrupted during the starting phase of your swingblock. So walking non-swingblocks should definitely be the ones to deal more dmg, so they can be used on purpose by advanced duelists when they feel they can take the risk. It adds a small interesting depth of knowing when to take that risk, versus not even thinking about it and just mashing down your mouse buttons to swingblock 100% of the time.

On the other hand i completely agree with running swings dealing less damage.
 
Top