in oblvion you had...

blunt, that is mace, war axe, battle axe and this thing called a warhammer despite not actualy being a warhammer.

blade, that is sword, longsword, dagger and claymore.

hand to hand had hands and marksman had "bow"

^ fairly depressing.

morrowind had more, but with morrowind it was very much the same- crossbows were in but they were done wrong, copies of other weapons were made but didnt realy add anything to gameplay (like scimitars). only weapon that was different was the spear (and its clone halberd)



hand to hand SHOULD be interesting. for both morrowind and oblivion hand to hand was simply a punch. a master of hand to hand combat would still punch! why not add some moves?

kick- learned via a low level perk with various ranks, doesnt take up a weapon space so you can use it with whatever weapon combo you want. and thus hand to hand is usefull to people who want to use weapons and spells.
-if a player kicks the body or shield, the kick will push them back
- if the player kicks the leg or the head, then extra dammage is done and the opponent is halted

counter attacks, for example an oponent may thrust with a dagger, the player sweeps the weapon arm out of the way and attacks the exposed ribs for extra dammage and a chance of dissarming them
disarming, with a chance of stealing their weapon and using it on them.


also- having different gauntlets should help with damage (plate doing more,fur being useless and actually doing less damage) but make the hand slower (except for perhaps glass gauntlets) . some gauntlets should have spiked/studed versions for more dammage, and knuckle dusters should do more damage at the expense of making counter attacks worse. khajits and argonian's claws should do more damage.


marksman- the skill with also no love

short bows (or composite), are the fastest firing, lightest weapon.

long bows - do more dammage, but are slower and take more skill to use

crossbows- are more fixed than other bows (require less skill, but dont get massive bonuses at higher levels) also- the way they are operated is very different- a bow is load,draw,aim and shoot whilst a crossbow is aim,shoot and loooooaaaaaad.

throwing weapons- one handed marksman weapons



but with normal weapons

1: asian style versions of weapons (katana for claymore, wakashi for swords, tanto for daggers, naginata for halberds) should do more damage and are quicker, but cost a lot more.)

2: straight bladed weapons should be more defensive, whilst curved swords more offensive .

3: warhammers are not sticks with things "the size of a child" , they are actualy more like regular hammers designed to be more effective against plate armour.

4: two handed maces aswell as one handed ones. axes should do more dammage to flesh and are more easily blocked, whilst maces are slower

5: pole arms (trolololololololol) and make halberds different from spears!!! . make spears throw able, but halberds get to swing wide. both weapons should be great on mounts and defensive




any other suggestions?

I'd really like it if they made it like in ME2. They dropped having 20 models within the same weapon group that were only different in their stats and instead limited you to only 2-3 weapons per weapon group that all were very different, both in terms of impact on combat and the way they felt. And it was the right way to go.
I wouldn't mind at all if they dropped the concept of Iron, Steel, Glass Sword etc. in favor of things like Longsword, Broadsword, Scimitar, Saber that each is their own story.

that sound like a very terrible idea.

Those are some good ideas. Especially the hand to hand part. :biggrin:

Maybe. But I only said I wouldn't mind it, not that that's the way it should be.
It wouldn't have to be as extreme as in ME2 of course. Just some noticeable differences to add a little bit of flair to the various weapons.

I definitely would love to see more variation within the same categories of weapons (tho personally I would use a rapier as a base model for "faster but less damaging" blades, I found the Katana in Oblivion very out of place)

I'm not sure Crossbows would be a good idea. In a role-playing game, having a weapon that is minimally affected by skill does not sound good to me.

Short bows should have another advantage. Longbows will be drawn even slower and be weaker on mounted horseback (if they have mounted combat), so despite being overall weaker (though not to an extreme), shortbows would have an advantage on horses.

I like all the hand to hand ideas.

To the main weapon ideas.

1. The idea that Asian styled weapons are innately better is stupid. No to that. A better idea: A katana should be lighter and slightly faster than a longsword, but break more easily, for example. Also, should have an advantage in slashing (which could be made a slightly different playstyle and have enemies which are weaker to it or stronger against it) than stabbing or striking. Similar principles should apply to all weapons (eg. Longsword is best at stabbing, mace is good at striking) and enemies (eg slashing is weak against armoured enemies and easier to block, but does more damage overall).

2. Uh.. why?

3. Yes.

4. Maybe, but warhammers are basically the 2 handed maces anyway.

5. There are no spears.

Mmmm... and my question is... why should asian weapons do more damage...?



I agree. Actually, there was a time when crossbows were forbidden because, with them, a farmer could kill a noble. And... if we want crossbows portrayed realistically, they needed a very long time to reload... not really useful, in a TES game.

With hand to hand there will have to be a lot of different animations with your ideas. You wouldn't use the same kick for the leg/head, you'd use for the body/shield. Same goes for different punches like straights, hooks, uppercuts ect.

Like most of your other ideas they are overcomplicated and way too hard to implement in the game. Like the counter striking of exposed areas determined by the weapon the opponent is using, what move the opponent is using. this would require a [censored] ton of programming, animation not mentioning the hundreds of different permutations of moves possible depending on the different variables. Also teaching the user to use all of the new possibilities would be a problem on it's own.

That was the worst part of ME2. It just made it 3rd person shooter with cod's rpg infrastructure,in fact call of duty's system had more of an impact on the game after awhile. My guess is mass effect 3 will just be plain TPS with a contrived sci-fi plot. I wanted to take that award they got last week and beat them to death with it just for the upgrades system.

My biggest gripe with the lack of variety in the purpose of weapons, is that when you play a warrior in Elder Scrolls games you would generally be proficient with multiple types of weapons- You can use swords and maces, large two-handed axes and short daggers. However, there was little difference in what these weapons were actually good for, making you simply pick whichever weapon that has highest DPS. If no weapon has the higher DPS you'd just pick whichever looks best. There was rarely any reason change your weapon unless it was from a ranged weapon to melee weapon; but melee weapons were practically interchangeable in purpose.

There was no weapon that was unbalanced and heavy but with a point, intended to breach thick armour. There was no weapon that was light and sharp, intended for dexterous characters to stab through the joints of armour. There was no difference between Axes and Swords, whereas an Axe is ultimately a heavy and unwieldy hacking weapon, and the Sword is a carefully balanced weapon for slashing and thrusting and actually quite light. I wish they would look at the various weapon types, and give them all a reason to be used in certain circumstances. Even the various materials could have certain things they were better or worse at. I think it should make sense to keep a war-hammer for smashing through metal armour, or an axe to quickly hack down attacking predators in the wild, or a Silver Sword in case you come upon a werewolf, and a few burning arrows for your bow in case you need to fight trolls. Ultimately though, these things didn't really matter in Oblivion. It was a waste of time and effort, and usually the weapon with the highest Damage-Per-Second did the job best, so simply specialising in a single weapon was the single sensible way of going about it. That should still be an option, of course, but a character with multiple developed skills in the area should clearly have an edge, much like a mage who have learnt several magical disciplines greatly increase his versatility.

It would require a fair amount of investment in the combat system over what they had back in Oblivion, but I think the changes would definitely be worthwhile.

i like most of these ideas but with the hand to hand thing punching someone in plate armor should have effectivness cut in half at least because the person in armor will fell it but most damage would be absorbed

I completely agree with this. It has always bugged me how much of a lack of variety there is in the weapons purposes. I like your ideas with hand to hand as well, wit ha couple other additions it could be a very fun skill to use.