I hope this helps to improves the animation of "pole-arm" weapons in the game

[doom_hamster]

@Incandescent

I even agreed that some animations weren’t clean, I’ve even agreed that there are solutions to the animations being made cleaner, I simply haven’t agreed that the combos themselves need changing.

i give you credit for admitting that. But what you miss is that there’s consequences to swapping attack order on a polearm weapon, more so than on a sword for example. Because a polearm is less nimble, longer shaft, a certain grip, it has more physical limitations, therefore, changed Heavy sweep animation needs to have a good transition to Light sweep, and Heavy stab both.

And i simply can’t see a way to do that, without making Heavy sweep a different attack profile (like a backspike strike, going through a cross, up left to down right). No, it can’t have the same damage profile as a heavy axe sweep, it would be stupid, and contrary to ingame logic of damage profiles (sword & big axe =/= blunt =/= spike or stab). So the Heavy sweep, in order to look “cleaner” after a Light sweep, it have to become a different attack essentially, which you are against saying

@Incandescent

I simply haven’t agreed that the combos themselves need changing.

And with all the animation work needed to make it “cleaner”, i ask you why can’t we just make the original, good looking moveset fully viable by stat tweaking? You and i gone in detail about how it could have been done, and i didn’t see a strong reason why it wouldn’t work, other than “i don’t know whether there’s numbers that can achieve it” or something.

[Incandescent]

@Incandescent

@doom_hamster

It doesn’t suit pushattack position, a heavy attack - yes, because whilst charging the attack you’d have more animation timeframe for regripping and rotating the pole.

ah perfect, problem solved then

moving on

@doom_hamster

and i didn’t see a strong reason why it wouldn’t work, other than “i don’t know whether there’s numbers that can achieve it” or something.

You’d have to buff to absurd levels to stop people from just spamming the old L1-block cancel, you ran what…40% attack speed merc? that ain’t exactly realistic. The Halberd rn genuinely fits the “versatile” tag on it whereas before it was versatile in the sense that it was clunky at everything. The current combos smooths the weapon out so people don’t feel like they’re just kinda mindlessly flailing if they aren’t doing the L1-block or pushattack spam. I do get that you prefer that style and don’t see it that way but people for the very most part aren’t on-board with that. Again the reason I bring up majority/community feedback is because that IS important, there’s no point in having a “perfect” weapon that pretty much no one uses or enjoys, especially when they like the current iteration. Hence my commitment to only cleaning up the animation, even if it were just animation timings so the combo looked less “floaty”.

[doom_hamster]

@Incandescent

@Incandescent

@doom_hamster

It doesn’t suit pushattack position, a heavy attack - yes, because whilst charging the attack you’d have more animation timeframe for regripping and rotating the pole.

ah perfect, problem solved then

moving on

wait a minute:

@doom_hamster

@Incandescent

could just have L1 stay the same is is currently, and then heavy 2 be up-left to down-right, similar to how billhook is but “acceptable” :^)

the problem is though, is that halberd Heavy sweep is chained to Heavy stab, the transition back and forth between them must also be smooth. +more work for animators to figure it out.

Because after new Heavy sweep (up left to down right), at the end of it, the weapon is on the wrong side, compared to Heavy stab animation.

The original moveset design has all fluid animations - after both sweeps the weapon position lends itself for stab very natural.

essentially, after that bill-like reverse sweep, the polearm is on the right to your body. But Heavy stab on halberd starts on the left to your body.

[Incandescent]

I mean, the lowest amount of work solution is just leave everything as is :^)

@doom_hamster

But as i pointed out, a backspike strike should have a new different damage profile.

y’know what, I’ll tango with this, tuskgor H2 profile. hell probs a custom damage profile with more damage since a halberd should pack more punch than a spear when swung like that but w/e it’d all require testing and the like.

[doom_hamster]

@Incandescent

@doom_hamster

But as i pointed out, a backspike strike should have a new different damage profile.

y’know what, I’ll tango with this, tuskgor H2 profile

what of it? Fairly low damage to off targets, compared to Halberd heavy sweep which is identical to Greatsword charged (for 2+ target infantry).

[Incandescent]

I mean as in a suitable basis for a backspike attack.

@Incandescent

hell probs a custom damage profile with more damage since a halberd should pack more punch than a spear when swung like that but w/e it’d all require testing and the like.

[doom_hamster]

@Incandescent

I mean as in a suitable basis for a backspike attack.

hell probs a custom damage profile with more damage since a halberd should pack more punch than a spear when swung like that but w/e it’d all require testing and the like.

sure thing a good basis. More damage to 1st target, and a little less to 2nd+ (or 3rd+) and it would be solid.

edit: w/o armor cleave of course, that would be very strange for a spike to do that. Even hitting multiple infantry is a bit of a stretch.

[Incandescent]

@doom_hamster

edit: w/o armor cleave of course, that would be very strange for a spike to do that. Even hitting multiple infantry is a bit of a stretch.

yeah for sure, my logic with the high stagger cleave is that if Kruber (an absolute unit, let’s be real) dragged a back-spike into a stack of naked norscans, he’s gonna knock 'em around

Also the small damage cleave should absolutely dumpster whatever it touches