Reality is messy and complicated. And very hard for a computer game to model faithfully. I think that Daggerfall and Morrowind made the best attempt to model real melee weapon combat that I've ever seen in a role playing game. It's too bad that the animations were not up to the job, because the idea far exceeds the execution.

In my opinion, they should have never put in the "always use best attack" option. If they had forced the player to actually learn how to use the Morrowind weapons properly, people would have complained that the Morrowind movement-based combat system was difficult, but there would have been fewer complaints about "missing."

For what it's worth, if you have reasonable skill with a Morrowind weapon, and you use the correct attack for that weapon, you'll find that the actual player combat action in Morrowind is far more realistic than in the later games. The attack animations are better than in the later games, because you can really thrust, slash, or chop at will. What's lacking is the enemy dodge/parry/block animation. You "see" your blade pass harmlessly through the enemy because the game lacks the ability to show your attack being thwarted due to your low skill or fatigue.

Op is right. I wouldn't go into extremes and Mimick morrowind's dice roll thing exactly, But i have to put these points out (op, you may add them if you like them)

- Armour is currently very blurred. Light armour and heavy armour are essentialy the same. In morrowind...
----- Unarmoured/light armour Didn't protect much whilst heavy/medium armour protected three/two times the ammount. The tradeoff was that the Latter skills got you hit more.
----- Heavier armour allowed for more enchantments
----- Light armour let you move faster. Heavy encumbered. Heavy armour drained fatigue and was worse for spells.

- What bethesda tried to do with skyrim was to differentiate blunt/blade/axe. Imo- This should be expanded upon
- Blade= High chance to hit, Very little shock through the armour. This would maybe make it more suitable for fighting unarmoured opponents
- Blunt= Low chance to hit- Huge damage through armour - This would make it more suitable for fighting heavy armour opponents
- Axe- In the middle of the two- suggested for light armour opponents.

Daggerfall had the different types of attack right. You had 4 different attacks, each a tradeoff between to-hit odds and damage. The quick and easy "thrust" attacks did the least damage, and were good against an agile opponent, while the overhand "chop" did heavy damage, but was hard to execute properly.

Morrowind took away the different to-hit odds, but retained the different damage ratings for 3 different attack types with each weapon. It also allowed you to "spam" rapid attacks for low damage, or hold the attack for a variable amount of time to do up to full rated damage, giving you a choice of "quantity vs quality" attacks. Morrowind gave, and Morrowind took away.

The only real issues in need of fixing were [1] either a missing dodge animation or the fact that the opponents never bothered to move, and [2] the problem that the to-hit odds were only marginally affected by the DIFFERENCE between your skills and the opponent's. If the opponents moved, it would have looked fine. If the odds were difference-based, you'd almost always hit a sluggish opponent like a Mudcrab (or one asleep or unaware), while a skilled swordmaster would simply sidestep, parry, block, or slip away from your ineptly wielded weapon. Combat could be fast, dynamic, and based on a combination of character skill and player choices in real time.

Stunlock would have been fixable by having the odds of it occurring based on a comparison between attack strength and the defender's Agility, with a random modifier, so it would happen sometimes, but not all the time. As you got stronger, it would happen more often. As you faced tougher opponents, their better stats would partially cancel out the increase. Facing a weaker and less skillful opponent, it would be pretty much a one-sided slaughter, like it would be in reality: first hit by the stronger party pretty much decides it.

Morrowind's combat had the right ideas behind it, but the execution needed a lot of work and some extra features to make it right. Unfortunately, Bethesda decided to reinvent the wheel, but forgot to make the character's abilites meaningful. Now, character skill does nothing but nerf damage and trigger perks, while the combat is just a matter of punching the button and waiting for the animation to cycle, while the weapon does exactly the same damage this hit as it did the last 20 times around, until you level up. A better combat game? Maybe, but too much of a repetitive race to see who runs out of hitpoints first. A better RPG? Sorry.

Hopefully, TES VI will bring back and merge all of the best features from DF, MW, OB, and SR, and end up as the "All Things to All Players" game of the millenium.

This is the biggest issue with Morrowinds combat system for me and for me this would not be fixed by some animation showing me that the enemy dodged my blade. Enemies need to get somewhat smarter and start to move around more. That is a fair combat system for me.

This I don't get. When I played a Nord warrior I never had repetitive fights. It was a wonderful mix of fast attacks, dodge the enemy attack, 5 quick steps back, bash with my shield as the enemy rushes towards me. It never played out the same way twice. To me, the combat system in Skyrim is the best so far. Because it is what you make of it. You want to spam attacks over and over again? Fine, you can do that. You want to use your mind to plan your attacks? Hell yes, you can do that. You want to end up in a panic state and act on pure instinct? Go right ahead.

Just my two cents.

Preaching to the choir man. Morrowind + the 2 expansions is much deeper and more satisfying than Oblivion and Skyrim.

The one thing morrowind lacked was high end content and Tribunal/Bloodmoon expansions fixed that. And this is not nostalgia either, as I recently played a fresh Morrowind GOTY toon on my XBOX360 just a few months ago. It was every bit as satisfying as it was when new.

The one thing I did differently was use a Morrowind Wiki, so I was able to find the worthwhile quests ahead of time, my first time playing XBOX Morrowind I had no guide at all and found everything by hand.

2 reasons
Combat mods are NOT AN OPTION for any console player
Combat mods are NOT official releases

Why doesn't it make sense? Some armor types protect against slashing, others protect more against piercing etc... this is a staple of RPGs for decades.

Plate armor, great for deflecting slashing, not so great against maces.

Skeletons, resist slashing, but take extra damage against maces.

Dragons - weak to piercing, strong against slashing AND bashing etc...

This is OLD balance that has worked pretty well for 20+ years

Then you would have to start calculate where you hit the enemy as most armors in Skyrim does not cover the whole body.
An enemy with fur armor would be equally hurt if I stabbed him to death or cut off his arm/neck. Way to many factors here for may taste. Also, if you ever tried to hold a sword, in real life, you'll instantly notice that slashing with a sword carries a great "blunt" effect. Should that be calculated in as well? Because slashing with a sword would do the same thing to a skeleton as a blunt attack.

The OLD balance have been annoying me since I first started to video games. It was probably great in the start but no it's time to try something different and see how that goes.

Morrowind is about character skill, it's not meant to be fair towards your skill as a player.

hardcoe-RPG-wise: Dodging animations could be done using several animations blended with procedural movements perhaps, wouldn't be repetitive then. 'Gothic-style' side steps and backward leaps would be nice for a failed attack. Maybe a 'Mount and Blade' style parry too. I've been thinking a blend between MW and Warband combat would be pretty kickass.

Or aRPG player skill route: Again add the Gothic style leaping for enemies, for the love of god let the players do dodge rolls, and look at Mount and Blade, Dark Souls or Dark Messiah for influence. TES has trouble deciding what it wants to be, which is why compared to other titles it's combat svcks balls.

I never said it was meant to be fair towards my skill as a player. When I said fair, I meant it in such a way that it's fair to everyone. Those who still want enemies that can dodge and those who don't want their character to magically miss.

As for as the dodging animations, I think that it will require many animations for it. It seems easier and better to have enemies actually moving around and actively dodge your blows.

Roll to hit, roll for damage. It's a great system.

did I hear word in this thread of a skyrim mod that makes combat like morrowind??? LINK PLZ

No, it couldn't. I much prefer Skyrim as is to Morrowind as is.

Actually, what you just described is "chopping," not "slashing." A proper slashing motion of a blade causes it to be drawn along its sharp edge. It slices, rather than hitting bluntly. That's why slashing swords, likes sabres, katanas, and cutlasses, have curved edges.

This distinction has been lost in the games since Morrowind.

No, what I described is actually slashing. And chopping. And yes, I know the difference. Let me explain:

Most of the swords in Skyrim are not curved. If you try to slash with the majority of the swords you will end up with a chop. A chop is basically the same as a blunt attack when coming from a sword. It all blends together.

If you get a curved sword and try to slash with you will notice that it's actually very difficult. Most people tend to end up with a chop. So you will need to be a skilled swordsman to pull it off. Not super-skilled, but somewhat skilled.

The distinction has not been lost in the games since Morrowind but in some cases, things blend together because it seems more reasonable. There's no reason to divide it so why do it?

I love it when it's so obvious when people just don't know what they talk about.
i mean, just flashy things? i guess then dual wielding in Daggerfall was just flash, spears and crossbows were just fanservice right? And heck, we don't need pretty graphics, combat should be pure numbers, when you meet an enemy calculations should happen automatically and call the winner, that's the pure RPG way!

And no, you still cannot just improve things. You cannot just take Morrowind's combat and tweak it, when the problem with it was much deeper. No it wasn't just the lack of dodging animation, the problem was that it neither was a skill based or stat based system. No matter how much of a master archer you were according to your stats, if you missed the shot, you missed, YOU HAVE TO AIM YOURSELF. No matter how slow and clumsy you were if you just stood back at the right moment, you dodged a blow even from a master swordsman.

IT DID NOT WORKED AT ALL, IT WAS BROKEN ON THE VERY BASIS.

It all blends together because the game allows one to be ignorant of the difference. The games are being simplified. Combat has been made easier, because you no longer have to learn how to do anything other than move your character around and mash an attack button.


And that is exactly what the Morrowind combat system is intended to simulate! (You're wrong about it being a chop, though. The curvature of the blade turns a swinging motion into a slashing motion; try imagining the curved edge as being exaggerated into a disk-shape, and you'll see what I mean.)


Because some players (myself included) actually care about it. An axe is not a "blunt," even if it became one in Oblivion. A katana is not used the same way that a broadsword is used. the older games took the difference into account. You may not care, but I do (Actually, you should care; the next simplification in the series may take away something that you liked.)

Frankly, I don't understand this defense of Bethesda's removal of game richness. Nobody is obligated to use all the tools in a TES game, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be there for those who do use them.

It blends together because that's the way it is. That's how it works in real life too. A weapon doesn't simply produce one type of damage. It just doesn't work that way. If Bethesda decides to calculate for all of this then they have one massive job in front of them.


How does it simulate that? It simulates that you miss. You will still hit the guy but you will end up with a chop. Just because they blade is curved doesn't mean that you're automatically gonna slash the guy. It takes some skill and most people will end up with a chop because they don't know how to move the blade properly. That's just how it works. If Morrowind were gonna simulate this they would need to have the weapon doing only chop damage until you got you swordskills high enough. But a katana would still be able to produce a blunt attack. So why divide it up?


Actually, an axe is both a 'chop' and a 'blunt'. Especially a two-handed axe. A katana is not used the same way that a broadsword is used... You're right about that but one can't simply ignore that a katana sometimes can produce the same type of damage as a broadsword.
I care but I don't have a reason to complain because I think Bethesda did the right thing.

Actually, most of the heavier longswords had one sharp edge and one dull. The sharp edge was for slicing and dicing those poor unarmored peasants and animals; the dull edge was for creasing armor without notching the blade. In effect, it was both "Blade" and "Blunt", and the expression "double edged sword" has a negative connotation as something with an undesirable aspect. Slashing weapons, like sabers, scimitars, cutlasses, and katanas, were excellent against unarmored opponents, but simply glided across the surface of armor, and made poor stabbing weapons at best (mostly thin and likely to bend or break). Stabbing or chopping with a thicker and heavier straight blade was more effective against armor, if you could afford the quantity of metal needed. Most cultures with curved swords relied on spears, maces, or composite bows (with less metal than a longsword) to take on the far less numerous armored opponents.

Morrowind allowed you to use a weapon in different ways, but delivered better damage by doing what the weapon was best at. Unfortunately, the game never gave you any real reason to use anything other than "best attack", but the combat system was at leasts designed to accommodate it. It also allowed for variable strength versus speed attacks by charging up the attack, and had a very quick and responsive feel to it. No, it wasn't great, but it had most of the pieces in place to become something great, with a fair amount of work.

Oblivion only had one basic "Attack", with no variation except "Power Attack", until you got perks to add some other funky special moves. In effect, you pushed the button and simply waited for the animation to play out, and it delivered the exact same damage every time. Gee, THAT's really tactical and exciting......

I can't comment on Skyrim, because the Steam requirement won't allow me to play it.

Skyrim features the same streamlined, simplified, first-person-shooter combat mechanics as Oblivion. The difference is that you get to choose your perks, and there are more than four.

Morrowind has a selectable option called "Always use best attack", or some such name. I always played with it off because it felt cheap to do otherwise. With the option off, you have real reasons for not using the best attack, because moving in the necessary direction isn't always convenient or smart.