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

SeV

Nerd
Internal Beta Team
Posts
1,155
Likes
2,047
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.

Yeah if it were 100% as you described it, that would likely alleviate the problem.

I understand where you're coming from on the swingblock stuff, and I guess I'm not super opposed to it, though I would prefer that there was simply no difference damage wise between them rather than buffing non-swingblocks, because I think they happen on accident most of the time, helping the lesser skilled duelists get a buff to their BP dmg. When I weigh the advantage of having an extra avenue of choice in high end dueling for small damage boosts, vs the majority of nonswingblocks which turn out to be accidental, I just think that it isn't that appealing.

I would say that what we have right now with the run/walk thing is okay, but I would prefer my changes. I guess the runhit change is the top prio for me and I'm glad you agree it should happen. I really think it would help alot with fixing certain aspects of dueling that are less than appetizing.
 

Tempest

Gameplay Design
Movie Battles II Team
Posts
731
Likes
1,105
Instead of running or walking doing more damage, how about if running makes you only take more damage if hit (I believe this is how it is in beta, which also means that running parries are at a disadvantage as well since they are 20% body hit damage equivalents)?
 
Posts
216
Likes
83
but how would you go about fighting multiple jedi/sith if running swings are nerfed even further to the point where u have to just walk and embrace the backwhack?
 

Stassin

Donator
Movie Battles II Team Retired
Posts
824
Likes
919
but how would you go about fighting multiple jedi/sith if running swings are nerfed even further to the point where u have to just walk and embrace the backwhack?
It actually gives the runner the advantage because he is the one who can decide when to stop running for a short instant and attack since his enemies are rushing towards him, so he can afford to stop running and walk for just an instant to get the extra damage, while it's harder for the ones chasing him to introduce some walking in their movements as the other guy is running away and they need to run too in order to reach him.
 

Starushka

Movie Battles II Team Retired
Posts
224
Likes
329
I strongly opposed to flinch removal, unless there is adequate alternative mechanic around. I'd rather reintroduce fixed Q3 mechanic with specific build and bake cyan with purple into Q3.
 

Tempest

Gameplay Design
Movie Battles II Team
Posts
731
Likes
1,105
I strongly opposed to flinch removal, unless there is adequate alternative mechanic around.
Being able to actually burn through their FP is a pretty good mechanic.

I'd rather reintroduce fixed Q3 mechanic with specific build
Soon™
and bake cyan with purple into Q3.
There shouldn't ever be a way to have q3 and Push 3 at the same time. That's what the trade-off/balance was for it. Never again.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SeV

Starushka

Movie Battles II Team Retired
Posts
224
Likes
329
Being able to actually burn through their FP is a pretty good mechanic.
Shouldn't be the only way. We should do more accent on mid to close distance, that's for sure, but don't flip the situation around. Drains should be increased outside IDR. First thought that gunner should have when he see jedi ran towards him - "I'll use my gun to drain him and kill" not "I'll wait till he comes and flinch him for death". That's true. Fix numbers.

Why flinch removal?

The main reason we introduced flinch is to fix situations were a new player can destroy a seasoned gunner by just holding W + Forward + Attack1. We should improve it, not remove. Make it more consistent and perhaps less punishing for saberists.

There shouldn't ever be a way to have q3 and Push 3 at the same time. That's what the trade-off/balance was for it. Never again.
Yes, i mentioned "specific build". I also would like to return to blue/yellow/red standard, and having cyan/purple as only styles available in Q3 stance.
 

SomeGuy

Donator
Internal Beta Team
Posts
397
Likes
194
Sev, you put into words how I've felt with recent builds but didn't know exactly why. The root causes you've stated are most definitely it. The changes you propose also seem fair and balanced while promoting more skillful, faster duels. I'd really like to try a system like that out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SeV

SK5

Moderator
Internal Beta Team
EU Official Server Admin
Posts
392
Likes
555
I have been reading through all this and im just gonna list some changes here that seem good or bad imo.

-Customizable round timers is a must. It will only benefit the community. At least give the option to set it from 5 minutes to around 1 hour. It would help out clans a lot and allow them to hold more custom events and take use of large custom maps.
-Knockback > flinch for previously stated reasons.
-As Sev said perks can be a really good thing if implemented correctly, i personally would like for them to exist but it might be better to put them on hold until a stable system is in place.
-If special moves will continue to only cost fp, there definetly needs to be a way to block some off the damage like NB as Tempest stated.
-ACM getting removed is probably a good thing.
-Increasing bp drains and making bp important from the beginning of the duel is great.
-Swing restricions seem like a good idea and fit well into my suggestion below.

Now heres a suggestion, i mostly want there to be a distinct feeling of being defensive and aggressive. That could be done by just giving a simple temporary buff to defence and attacking.

Defence buff: Pblock gives a temporary bp regen boost that stacks up based on how many consecutive pblocks you land. For every 1 consecutive pblock your bp regen gets increased by 5% for 5 seconds. So if you landed 4 pblocks in a row, you would have 20% more bp regen for 20 seconds.

Attacking buff: Every successful single hit/halfswing/the first successful hit of a combo would grant you a 5% damage buff for the next combo. So lets say i did 4 successful halfswings, my next combo would do 20% more damage. If you step outside of combat for around 5 seconds, your stacks of damage would diminish rapidly. Basically it would be similiar to how you gain acm at the moment.

Now both of these buffs would be capped around 20% to not make them too powerful but i believe these could really make the combat more varied and overall more "rich". The reason the attack buff is better than good old acm is because it wouldnt restrict style switching but actually promote it and it would vanish if you were to run away and regen bp. It would even encourage skillful style switching by gaining stacks of damage with something like blue, then switching over to red to release a much more powerful combo. It would also promote skillful pblocking rather than parry spamming as you would actually gain something from pblocking.

You might think that this is "overcomplicating" but its really not. To simplify it, the more you pb, the more bp you get and the more you attack the more damage you do. I think this would open so many more doors to have your own unique style of playing and just make the dueling system simple with a high skillcap which i believe is the goal currently. Other option is that you might think this is completely unnecessary, which it is but it would only make the gameplay more rich. Note that the numbers are completely up to debate.

If you do think that this is worth considering, i would love to hear your thoughts on it.
Also this please.
 
Posts
821
Likes
928
Well, i meant jedi is ez compared to gunners. While this not may be the case when considering players who have already played other shooter games (but then the same could be said for people who have played sword games and not shooter games ?), for someone who has no gaming experience jedi is definitely much easier to play than gunner in this mod.

@SeV i forgot to mention something, don't you think starting swings, since they are slower than halfswings, should be buffed for example in the form of being impossible to full-PB but only semi-PB ? It's something that's been bugging me for a while since i introduced the new PB in v1.1, starting swings are much easier to PB than halfswings which seems to artificially deter straight offense for no reason in favor of defense. Leading to artifacts like swinging first in the air to get a halfswing on the enemy, which i don't believe should disappear (and they wouldn't with that change, since a faster swing could lead to a full bodyhit instead of a semi-PB), but starting swings just seem way too heavily disadvantageous.
There are negatives to swinging in the air and then landing a halfswing though, because if the other player 4 hit parries you then you've lost that engagement (you land 3 swings they land 4)

at least with yellow i'd say that the slower first swing encourages better timing/unpredictability/yaw

this is true with red though, most red players only use two hits of a combo because the first one is too slow


If you step outside of combat for around 5 seconds, your stacks of damage would diminish rapidly. Basically it would be similiar to how you gain acm at the moment.

i can already see people desperately running across dotf hangar for 5 seconds so you don't keep your damage buff
 
Last edited:

SK5

Moderator
Internal Beta Team
EU Official Server Admin
Posts
392
Likes
555
i can already see people desperately running across dotf hangar for 5 seconds so you don't keep your damage buff

Running is a bigger problem right now than what it would be if a system like this was in place. Thats why its a temporary buff and thats why trying to pblock will be rewarded, to decrease mindless running. Currently people run across hangar trying to shadowswing just to drain your acm, that wouldnt happen nearly as much with something like this. Also if someone runs across hangar just to regen bp, why would you duel them in the first place?

Quoting Sev:
-If not holding block, aka running, force focus is increased to 0.5 sec for FB 1-2 and 1 sec for FB 3. This will enable you to pull runners if they aren't doing a proper tactical retreat, resulting in more rewards for skillful play and making it easier for pro's to kill running noobs that don't know what they are doing.
 
Posts
141
Likes
120
If you can alternate between swingblocks for safety and non-swingblocks for more damage output, it'd make for a better and more dynamic sabering system, otherwise you're forced into a specific playstyle in order to be the most effective.
If you can alternate between walkhits for safety and runhits for more damage output, it'd make for a better and more dynamic sabering system, otherwise you're forced into a specific playstyle in order to be the most effective.

Force focus buff against runners (not ones who dodge and then either attack or walk away) is a good idea.
 

GoodOl'Ben

Nerd
Donator
Movie Battles II Team Retired
Posts
1,116
Likes
1,656
If you can alternate between swingblocks for safety and non-swingblocks for more damage output, it'd make for a better and more dynamic sabering system, otherwise you're forced into a specific playstyle in order to be the most effective.
I believe this is already in place.

If you can alternate between walkhits for safety and runhits for more damage output, it'd make for a better and more dynamic sabering system, otherwise you're forced into a specific playstyle in order to be the most effective.
Currently walking = running as far as I know. Would be best if it was not like this.

Force focus buff against runners (not ones who dodge and then either attack or walk away) is a good idea.
Force Focus buff against players with low BP would be best.
 
Posts
29
Likes
38
I don't know how to say this but listen to Sev, his ideas are amazing he really knows his way around a Saber(no pun intended) like really!
For my part, it's kinda unrealistic i guess but i agree with Eazye there, revamp to the v0 saber things and make them better. Don't fix what isn't broke, also don't change for the sake of changing.
 

Stassin

Donator
Movie Battles II Team Retired
Posts
824
Likes
919
I strongly opposed to flinch removal, unless there is adequate alternative mechanic around. I'd rather reintroduce fixed Q3 mechanic with specific build and bake cyan with purple into Q3.
I totally understand that feeling, but after reading sev's comment about wookiees i just came to a realization. Melee wook can just destroy any gunner when they're in their face at the cost of some HP, and that's way easier to do than the forward + attack easy kills that jedis could get in the old system (but of course jedi have much more mobility compared to wooks, and force powers, making them harder to deal with than wooks in general, though they also have less HP so they also take much more of a risk when they yolo forward + attack). Flinch and everything else i added to jedi was for the sake of making them harder to play, and i believe it did, however it's overcomplexified and not in line with the rest of the gameplay.

Snipers can get ez instakills, mandos can ez rocket you in your face, heck secondary frag nades often give you the insta win vs other gunners, there are a ton of abilities which in some scenarios feel completely unfair. It makes no sense for jedi to have a plethora of additional mechanics to try and make their engagements with gunners more "skill-based" (more like a gun vs gun fight without other abilities), when the rest of the gameplay has none of that, and it simply feels bad for most people. Gun vs gun fights are already naturally like that, at the very least because they require aim, and there's nothing we can do to introduce aim in saber swings (i tried encouraging deflect but at the end of the day it's just not working).

It would be justified if, say, gunners also had new alternate mechanics to be able to partially negate a secondary frag nade's knockdown, partially negate a rocket's damage, if gunners somehow had consistent ways to block or negate a wook's fists, but they don't. Jedi should also have their trademark ez mode forward + attack instakills (on top of everything else which is also ez mode for them) at the cost of some HP, if they don't it's not really mb2 anymore, it's a more convoluted game. Jedi are ez to play (compared to gunners), there's nothing we can do about it without destroying the harmony of general gameplay. Which of course doesn't mean they shouldn't be balanced.
 
Posts
821
Likes
928
Running is a bigger problem right now than what it would be if a system like this was in place. Thats why its a temporary buff and thats why trying to pblock will be rewarded, to decrease mindless running. Currently people run across hangar trying to shadowswing just to drain your acm, that wouldnt happen nearly as much with something like this. Also if someone runs across hangar just to regen bp, why would you duel them in the first place?

Quoting Sev:
-If not holding block, aka running, force focus is increased to 0.5 sec for FB 1-2 and 1 sec for FB 3. This will enable you to pull runners if they aren't doing a proper tactical retreat, resulting in more rewards for skillful play and making it easier for pro's to kill running noobs that don't know what they are doing.
didnt notice that bottom bit about FF, fair enough

dont see why it couldnt be tested at least
 
Posts
234
Likes
258
Agree with Sev on almost everything.
Just don't know if I really want swingblocks to be stronger than normal hits. But hey.

Everything else is pretty much on point

ACM
convoluted, contrived, invisible mechanic that you cannot keep proper track of. And furthermore there are no subtle mindgames with ACM, since faking ACM is impossible/useless.

You would think that making ACM more sensitive and dynamic would improve the game, but it does the opposite. ACM promotes passive, drawn out, runhit parry styles. It promotes long slow duels. And furthermore, it isn't even a visible mechanic the way BP is. You have to sit there and count your swings vs the opponents swings, but this is also difficult because sometimes a swing gives more ACM than other times. It is a convoluted mess that drags everything about dueling down, down dooooown into a very one dimensional and boring place.

This is quite important.
If my opinion, or, say, feedback have a value - I wish to add this value to what's Sev said about ACM.
ALL OF IT.

Saber perks
I'm not a fan of saber perks, honestly. When they were first introduced I was against it, and now I'm still against it. Perks like "Drain BP on PB" is pure evil. It doesn't add any "personallity" to saberstyle, It just forces players to use certain strategy with said style. This is what you call "boring gameplay"

Reintroduce swing restricions
Yes, for the love of the god, please do!
I however suggest that it would require some tweaking to PB zones, because it would be much easier to PB with swing restrictions in place.

NB & NB Counter
Um. I don't know.

Do we really need two types of PB? I don't mind it, but cannot tell without proper testing.

Normal block was quite unreliable, and It also was dependant on stance (not saber style, but stance). It surely added some flavor and "personallity" to styles. For example staff pblocking was quite unique and fun on it's own. But uhh, I never liked it.

As replacement of current pb? No, please.
As some additional way of pblocking? Um... don't know.. maybe.
 
Top