Unseen Studios

A friend and I came up with an idea about attack run that would make a lot more sense.

Instead of running straight at the opponent and stopping in front of them to attack, you should run past your opponent while holding your sword out to hit them.
If you think about it this would make a lot more sense in real life, if you run at someone you wouldn't run straight at them you would run beside them and slash on your way through.

Just a thought.

I like it...I had a whole bunch of ideas for battle moves like attack run and spin...but for more pvp use..

Well think about a real life fight, would I chop at you while coming straight at you and then just stand in front of you like an idiot, or run past you and swing?

Makes sense to me. But how would you determine which side to attack on?

right handed, left handed or ambi-dexterous.

You could make it so that every race has a % change to be each. If your right handed and you did atk run you'd have your enemy on your right so that you lead with your left. If your ambidexterous you randomly switch hands.

Right handed, left handed or ambi-dexterous thing makes it too complicated. That's why there would have to be some kind of swing animation where it shows the character swinging his sword on both sides. We got this idea from the new Legend of Zelda game where Link can swing his sword and run at the same time. So I said wouldn't it be cool if thats how the attack run on xenimus worked. Anyways, if you look at the animation in this game what I'm talking about would make alot of sense.

Seems complicated. Remember, we have to keep things simple.

It's really no more complicated than EJ's attack run. All I'm really saying is run past and hit instead of run straight towards and hit.

i dont see the point. Are you talking about making them run far past the enemy or whatever cause that would suck since then the opponent could heal or then beam you etc. Also since attack run serves many purposes other then to attack it could be weird.

No, just run right past them.

so you would end up farther away from the enemy after the attack correct? If so then i think the idea wouldnt work to well cause what if you are just lunging for instance to pick up something? your char would soar past the thing your trying to get, also during pvp it would be pointless since noone uses lunge during pvp, its only used to get closer or farther from the enemy.

my Idea on attack run is to not get hit... and if you want to get closer trans wands make a wonderful suffice to it. also I could see many disadvantages to it in the long run for pvp..like thats all theyll do. attack run attack run especially if its a never miss type attack. In essence the Idea is logical but .. wth I like the idea make it more useful then what it is now anyways

instead of running straight at the enemy and trying to do a down-hand slash right in front of them, like on the left, you would run slightly past them while swinging sideways, which is a more natural thing to do.

Attack run isn't for getting away from the enemy, it's for attacking them (like the name suggests)

thadiusofx3 wrote:

instead of running straight at the enemy and trying to do a down-hand slash right in front of them, like on the left, you would run slightly past them while swinging sideways, which is a more natural thing to do.

Attack run isn't for getting away from the enemy, it's for attacking them (like the name suggests)

Who uses it to do that? noone lol, its main use is kinda like trans , but for figs.

well it could be dual-purpose, when "cast" on a player it does what I suggested, when cast on bare ground, it does it's normal thing

thadiusofx3 wrote:well it could be dual-purpose, when "cast" on a player it does what I suggested, when cast on bare ground, it does it's normal thing

yea i guess.. For some reason i just feel like it would be to hard to code or would be glitchy. But if it worked like that that would be kinda kool.

The way I saw it was for more of a hit and run move. PVP against other fighter type would allow you to hit and not be hit. PVP against mage types would make it harder for them to target you and possibly help you hit them as they trans around like they usually do.

it's basically the same code as checking to see if you should attack a player when you click


if you click on a tile, if there is a player there attack him, if not, move there

just go from that with if you are casting attack run and there is a player there, do attackrunplayer();
if not, do attackrunground();

This is how I see it you move from the black dot to the tip of the arrow. The red area is the damage zone and the blue dots are what you would hit.

Theoretically there are two types of attacks one would do when performing a forward charge. There is that which you suggested, a slashing attack, or the attack that would maximize damage with swords or pikes of any sort, which is a thrust.

A thrust maximizes the damage of stabbing/piercing weapons. A traditional medieval sword is not a hacking weapon like an axe, it is a piercing weapon (look it up if you don't believe me).

Anyway, what I am suggesting is, don't bother with the complicated side swing mechanics. Simply imply that the charge attack acts as if the person performing it plans to perform either a straight down head crush (with a blunt or hacking weapon of some kind) or a thrusting attack as with a sword or piercing weapon. It's a simple assumption to make, and doesn't require any bothersome changes to play mechanics.

Actually, it's both

A sword fundamentally consists of a blade, with one or two edges for striking and cutting, a point for thrusting, and a hilt for gripping.

Rapiers were primarily a thrusting weapons, while knightly swords were large, heavy slashing weapons, and in between there was the cut-and-thrust sword which could be used to stab through weak spots in opponents armor, or for a quick devastating slash.

Welcome to wikipedia, a bed of possibly correct, but possibly horribly incorrect statements. A sword that you will see at the renaissance faire will display the properties which you are thinking of.

There are many types of swords. I'm aware of the fact that a rapier is primarily piercing weapon as are most other swords (exceptions being the katana, saber, or other thick one edged swords which are almost exclusively used in hacking/slashing attacks due to the reasons they were created / armor they faced). The fact of the matter is, with what you typically refer to as a longsword, broadsword, bastard sword, shortsword, etc the most effective attack is a piercing attack. The types of armor that these weapons faced dictated that piercing attacks were more effective.

Think about it, typical materials armor was crafted with in the medieval time frame (aka pre-gunpowder):
Hardened Leather
Iron Studded Leather
Chain or Ring Mail
Plated Iron

You're dealing with a problem here. You are not going to slash through these types of materials with a sword whose breadth is approximately about the same as your index, middle and ring fingers (I seriously hope you have seen a sword that was actually around in the middle ages, they were rather thin bladed). A piercing attack would puncture hardened leather, maneuver around the studs in studded armor, have a better chance of doing any sort of damage vs mail armor and of course a thrust would allow you to pinpoint your attack against plated armor's weak points (they had em).

Swords used as slashing weapons had to be thick and more like cleavers. Sabers, Scimitars and Katanas fit this bill, but none are the swords that most people consider when thinking of swords (at least not in the western world).

Either way, this is incredibly off topic, I'll get back on track.

What you are suggesting serves only to complicate a game's play mechanics for simple (and unnecessary) flashyness. Whether you are standing next to or standing in front of someone you still have to duke it out blow for blow as any class that relies on melee capacity to win fights. My theory: when in doubt use the KISS principle ('Keep it sweet and simple' or 'Keep it simple, stupid' for those who don't know... I prefer the later of the two).

why? 'cause Occam says so!

The goal of project volucris is to recreate the old xenimus before EJ screwed it up. By adding this move to the game it would make the game farther away from what it was originally intended. When me and thad came up with this idea I just thought it would make sense. It could be considered appropriate if the game's goal was to remake the xenimus before spin attack and wanted fighters to have a multi attack by adjusting the attack run and while I thought we had the same idea when we came up with it. Thad's idea was so similiar to the attack run already in the game it would make little change to the game play if it was in fact done that way.

The idea is not just to recreate old xenimus but make it better.