So you find everyone walking around with identical bows and identical swords entertaining? I don't know why PVP is such a big deal. The combat system is just as crappy now as it was in indev which was three years ago. The weapons would have things that others would not. Like the battleaxe would deal more damage than the sword but there would be more times between strikes. Swords would be ineffective against armor, and war hammers only point would be to destroy armored players. Like the war hammer would deal like half a heart less damage to an armored player as it would to an armored player.
So you find everyone walking around with identical bows and identical swords entertaining? I don't know why PVP is such a big deal. The combat system is just as crappy now as it was in indev which was three years ago. The weapons would have things that others would not. Like the battleaxe would deal more damage than the sword but there would be more times between strikes. Swords would be ineffective against armor, and war hammers only point would be to destroy armored players. Like the war hammer would deal like half a heart less damage to an armored player as it would to an armored player.
You mean to an unarmored player for the very last bit. Half a heart extra to an unarmoured player.
I wanna see some preference go into combat, aswell as tactics.
I think the horses need to play more combat roles aswell, if they do get added, a sprinting horse increases your damage aswell.
I think about the best you could do in theory would be mounted on a diamond armour horse with full diamond yourself then a blunderbuss, run into battle to fire a shot then quickly escape to reload defeating the weakness of the blunderbuss reload.
Pretty sure they did use blunderbuss cavalry IRL though.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I put my shirt on one leg at a time, just like everybody else.
I think your being a bit over the top. 4 pigmen on your tail with no armor?!?!? Of course that'll kill yo. Are you nuts. Hey Mojang I want more weapons in the game. It'll make the harder situations easier but the you'll be able to rule the night a single weapon
I think your being a bit over the top. 4 pigmen on your tail with no armor?!?!? Of course that'll kill yo. Are you nuts. Hey Mojang I want more weapons in the game. It'll make the harder situations easier but the you'll be able to rule the night a single weapon
I do not understand why radioactive uses no armour.
I think its because he barely ever mines.
But... Combat system is terrible full stop, we need NOT more powerful weapons but more specialised tactical ones to offer an advantage that ain't all round.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I put my shirt on one leg at a time, just like everybody else.
I support more weapons, just because I like the variety, frankly, I don't care too much about the different weapons having different effects overall, just so long as there is a visual difference to suit player tastes. I'm a fan of variety....(yes, I said it again)
That being said, I do think for 'variety sake' the different weapons should not be specific clones of each other, but instead offer some minor game balanced differences to make them comparable to the bow (for ranged) and the sword (for melee).
Weapons that do more damage or have a further reach would not be able to be used as rapidly as faster weapons that did less damage and had a shorter reach (ie. Spear {2 block reach} v. War Hammer {high damage} v. Rapier {high speed})
I don't use TNT, but I have a metric crap ton of gunpowder... I would like a use for that, other than for potion brewing, so I'm definitely partial to the idea of medieval style firearms.
Heck, I'd like to see working siege weapons as well, Battering Ram, Ballista, Catapult, Trebuchet, Cannon, etc.
I support more weapons, just because I like the variety, frankly, I don't care too much about the different weapons having different effects overall, just so long as there is a visual difference to suit player tastes. I'm a fan of variety....(yes, I said it again)
That being said, I do think for 'variety sake' the different weapons should not be specific clones of each other, but instead offer some minor game balanced differences to make them comparable to the bow (for ranged) and the sword (for melee).
Weapons that do more damage or have a further reach would not be able to be used as rapidly as faster weapons that did less damage and had a shorter reach (ie. Spear {2 block reach} v. War Hammer {high damage} v. Rapier {high speed})
I don't use TNT, but I have a metric crap ton of gunpowder... I would like a use for that, other than for potion brewing, so I'm definitely partial to the idea of medieval style firearms.
Heck, I'd like to see working siege weapons as well, Battering Ram, Ballista, Catapult, Trebuchet, Cannon, etc.
Yes, I think swords and bows should be the base weapons.
If it has more DPS and more range there's a problem.
Let there not be a weapon better than the rest so that it is an obvious choice for PVP.
I understand that some weapons should be worse or more favourable for certain AI.
But no weapon that just dominates is necessary.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I put my shirt on one leg at a time, just like everybody else.
Things like the warhammer would not be that good on a unarmored player, but great against armored players. The axes would be halfway in between, and the swords would be best against unarmored players. The bow and or crossbow would be the cheapest, but the musket would demolish a health bar, but it is balanced because it would take a long time to reload, and firing would be costly. Quivers, musket ball pouches and gunpowder pouches would also help balance this out. The musket ball pouch would only hold like eight of whatever the hell you put into it, and same with the gunpowder pouch. After that, you would have to reload both. I have a good idea. For massive PVP like on the xbox one or PS4 or even PC, it would be cool it they added all of this and gunpowder kegs. The gunpowder kegs would act like cauldrons and would slightly fill up from left triggering on it with gunpowder to refill it. If you have a gunpowder pouch, you can left trigger on it with the pouch to instantly refill it no matter how empty it was.
Oh and also the javelins/spears. The javelins would only be used as a throwing weapon, while the spears could be both, but less damage than any other weapon. The shields would absorb most of the impact, but you can only use them while holding nothing or a one handed weapon. It would parry like a regular sword.
Things like the warhammer would not be that good on a unarmored player...
You've obviously never handled a real warhammer... (just teasing)
But yes, it was designed for penetrating metal armor, but it was also quite effective against unarmored opponents. Not great for parry/defensive (unless you study binding techniques for weapon to weapon melee combat), higher damage per hit, but not as quick as the sword in general.
A blade would kill an unarmored person way faster than a hammer, but a hammer would kill an armored person way faster. A blade cuts the victim open, spewing blood everywhere, wherefore the blunt will at most stun the victim for a little bit and maybe break a bone or two. If hit in the head, it will probably be instant, but I would personally use a warhammer in the midst of a zombie apocalypse depending on what kind of zombies they are. If they are slow zombies, then it would be great. If it was world war z zombies, then better break out the machine gun or samurai sword.
The blunt will cave in the armor, so the caved in armor would also possibly cut into the wearer's body, inflicting more damage. A hammer would be the best weapon to fell the royal tin can. (aka templar)
If the hammer user tried to block, then it would stun them. I spit logs with a hammer all the time and when you miss the wedge and hit the handle of the hammer, it hurts because it sends a shock all through your body that stuns you for the next five seconds.Does anyone else think that templars look like royal tin cans?
Umm... again... never really used a real war hammer... they often come with a spiked end which is quite deadly and can way easily go through flesh quite deep... might not be getting it back out right away for a second swing though... especially if it gets stuck:
If the hammer user tried to block, then it would stun them. I spit logs with a hammer all the time and when you miss the wedge and hit the handle of the hammer, it hurts because it sends a shock all through your body that stuns you for the next five seconds.
You don't block with a war hammer in the same way that you split logs... You catch the blow, and direct the force back toward the head... because there are no quillions nor any other hand guards.... Or you use two hands spread to each end of the weapon to perform a reinforced block with the shaft. Your logic is not sound for being stunned while blocking... it is, however, a much more complex maneuver than with a sword which was designed for it's offensive AND defensive capabilities.
You must keep in consideration that minecraft is as much of a fantasy game as like elder scrolls. But I see your reasoning, maybe they could add little warhammers like the ones depicted here and humongous ones you see in other games. Depending on the number of enemies, a sledgehammer could be a pretty good weapon. Like if someone is swinging a blade at you, and you only have time to use the shaft as the object that blocks you, that will recoil probably both the person welding the blade and the person holding the hammer that was hit with the blade. But please keep in consideration that minecraft is a game and not real life. Just as much of a game as elder scrolls.
I agree with this post, I think this literally all should be added, it sounds great, it would add a new FUN phase to Minecraft as fun as it already is and all, this could bring more, intractable fun etc...
You've obviously never handled a real warhammer... (just teasing)
But yes, it was designed for penetrating metal armor, but it was also quite effective against unarmored opponents. Not great for parry/defensive (unless you study binding techniques for weapon to weapon melee combat), higher damage per hit, but not as quick as the sword in general.
Some were made for not penetrating the armour but just to dent it so that the armour itself was the killer, not like an unarmored person would fare better though.
Something that penetrates IMO would be more like a horsemans pick.
I suppose those pointier polearms/ mauls that could be described as hammers were made for penetration.
If that was the case maybe pick axes should be about as effective as the sword on an armoured player assuming the sword is worse against an armoured player as a Pickaxe would be against an unarmored.My condolences you already talked about warhammers above.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I put my shirt on one leg at a time, just like everybody else.
That picture of the warhammer you posted looks very decorative.
And the spike looks about the size you would expect as a horsemans pick.
The one in the video is far more balanced.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I put my shirt on one leg at a time, just like everybody else.
You don't know that, xbox has gotten plenty of stuff before PC. Also, the ratio of people for and against this idea is more for the idea, wherefore on the PC area, it is a lot more towards against. If they added it to this version and the console versions in general, they would be doing us a favor, where if they added it to PC first, it would provoke everyone. A lot of people that post here that are against the idea don't know anything about combat, or anything about history. It is worse in the PC area though. There is a lot more of them in the PC area though. If everyone actually knew a thing or two about combat or history, then there would be a lot more valid arguments there. I have yet to see a valid argument against the idea, which leads me to think that they should add it. If there is no valid reason as to why they shouldn't add it, then they should add it.
Feather helmets would be sweet.
Good for team games too that don't wanna have one team in diamond another in gold or something.
If I was to make a server with these ideas I'd half mine out everything first, then even iron weapons would be late game.
Hardly anybody would have anything diamond.
People might actually be using a mixture of leather and iron armour and stuff.
People with bad armour might choose to be archers.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I put my shirt on one leg at a time, just like everybody else.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You mean to an unarmored player for the very last bit. Half a heart extra to an unarmoured player.
I wanna see some preference go into combat, aswell as tactics.
I think the horses need to play more combat roles aswell, if they do get added, a sprinting horse increases your damage aswell.
I think about the best you could do in theory would be mounted on a diamond armour horse with full diamond yourself then a blunderbuss, run into battle to fire a shot then quickly escape to reload defeating the weakness of the blunderbuss reload.
Pretty sure they did use blunderbuss cavalry IRL though.
I do not understand why radioactive uses no armour.
I think its because he barely ever mines.
But... Combat system is terrible full stop, we need NOT more powerful weapons but more specialised tactical ones to offer an advantage that ain't all round.
That being said, I do think for 'variety sake' the different weapons should not be specific clones of each other, but instead offer some minor game balanced differences to make them comparable to the bow (for ranged) and the sword (for melee).
Weapons that do more damage or have a further reach would not be able to be used as rapidly as faster weapons that did less damage and had a shorter reach (ie. Spear {2 block reach} v. War Hammer {high damage} v. Rapier {high speed})
I don't use TNT, but I have a metric crap ton of gunpowder... I would like a use for that, other than for potion brewing, so I'm definitely partial to the idea of medieval style firearms.
Heck, I'd like to see working siege weapons as well, Battering Ram, Ballista, Catapult, Trebuchet, Cannon, etc.
Yes, I think swords and bows should be the base weapons.
If it has more DPS and more range there's a problem.
Let there not be a weapon better than the rest so that it is an obvious choice for PVP.
I understand that some weapons should be worse or more favourable for certain AI.
But no weapon that just dominates is necessary.
You've obviously never handled a real warhammer...
But yes, it was designed for penetrating metal armor, but it was also quite effective against unarmored opponents. Not great for parry/defensive (unless you study binding techniques for weapon to weapon melee combat), higher damage per hit, but not as quick as the sword in general.
The blunt will cave in the armor, so the caved in armor would also possibly cut into the wearer's body, inflicting more damage. A hammer would be the best weapon to fell the royal tin can. (aka templar)
If the hammer user tried to block, then it would stun them. I spit logs with a hammer all the time and when you miss the wedge and hit the handle of the hammer, it hurts because it sends a shock all through your body that stuns you for the next five seconds.Does anyone else think that templars look like royal tin cans?
You don't block with a war hammer in the same way that you split logs... You catch the blow, and direct the force back toward the head... because there are no quillions nor any other hand guards.... Or you use two hands spread to each end of the weapon to perform a reinforced block with the shaft. Your logic is not sound for being stunned while blocking... it is, however, a much more complex maneuver than with a sword which was designed for it's offensive AND defensive capabilities.
And in case you're interested:
Check out this vid
Like and Subscribe
Some were made for not penetrating the armour but just to dent it so that the armour itself was the killer, not like an unarmored person would fare better though.
Something that penetrates IMO would be more like a horsemans pick.
I suppose those pointier polearms/ mauls that could be described as hammers were made for penetration.
If that was the case maybe pick axes should be about as effective as the sword on an armoured player assuming the sword is worse against an armoured player as a Pickaxe would be against an unarmored.My condolences you already talked about warhammers above.
And the spike looks about the size you would expect as a horsemans pick.
The one in the video is far more balanced.
You don't know that, xbox has gotten plenty of stuff before PC. Also, the ratio of people for and against this idea is more for the idea, wherefore on the PC area, it is a lot more towards against. If they added it to this version and the console versions in general, they would be doing us a favor, where if they added it to PC first, it would provoke everyone. A lot of people that post here that are against the idea don't know anything about combat, or anything about history. It is worse in the PC area though. There is a lot more of them in the PC area though. If everyone actually knew a thing or two about combat or history, then there would be a lot more valid arguments there. I have yet to see a valid argument against the idea, which leads me to think that they should add it. If there is no valid reason as to why they shouldn't add it, then they should add it.
Good for team games too that don't wanna have one team in diamond another in gold or something.
If I was to make a server with these ideas I'd half mine out everything first, then even iron weapons would be late game.
Hardly anybody would have anything diamond.
People might actually be using a mixture of leather and iron armour and stuff.
People with bad armour might choose to be archers.