I think it is a bold attempt for Bethesda to include dual wielding feature in this game. If you really dig deep into dual wielding techniques, there are a lot of possibilities. And here I'm not talking about the fancy ninja moves.

There are several configurations of dual wielding:
1. matched dual wields. Both hands are holding the same type of weapon, I mean same length and weight. For example, two short swords or two long swords, or two maces.
2. mismatched dual wields. One hand is holding a long weapon and the other hand a short weapon.
3. Weapon+shield (you'll see why I counted this as dual wielding later)

Now, when you hold two weapons, theoretically you should be able to: attack with both hands; attack with one hand and block with the other; block with both. To implement this you'll need 4 buttons which is not realistic, so there needs some limitations and balancing. Following is my design of dual wielding:

With option 1, you are able to block with two weapons, giving you a better protection than blocking with one hand/weapon. However you are not allowed to block with one hand and attack with the other (just for balancing purpose). Also you are able to attack with both weapons at the same time, giving you double damage.

With option 2, you are able to block with one weapon (the short one, like in some fencing practice) and while you are blocking you can attack at the same time with the other, giving you high damage since the enemy exposed his vulnerability while attacking you. However, you cannot attack with both weapons since they are not the same length. The short weapon used for blocking will not give you a lot of protection either.

With option 3, you are able to block with the shield, but you can't attack while blocking (because the shield is in the way). However the shield gives you the highest protection, and you might be able to shield bash.

That being said, a good addition would be the requirement of timing while blocking with your weapon. This makes sense, because the shield gives you a large area of protection while you have to watch the direction of enemy attack when you block with a sword. The advantage of blocking with a shorter weapon in option 2 is that shorter the weapon, easier it is to time the block, because it takes a shorter time to place a lighter weapon in a certain position. Dual blocking in option 1, on the other hand, is slower and harder to time the block. When you are wielding two heavy long weapons, you might as well give up weapon blocking since it takes way too long.

How do you think?

I think Bethesda will make an epic Dual Wield system, I'm already excited beyond imagination to finally use my two favorite types of magic, lightning and frost together at once :celebration:

I think dual wielding sounds like crap, I hate how everyone thinks people need to dual wield something, whether its handguns or swords I still hate it.

sounds like hate crime with no reason...

Meh, whatever. I did that in Morrowind and Oblivion both. Spell with both lightning and frost damage = using lightning and frost together at once. :shrug:

now you will be weaving them yourself instead of letting the game do it for you. less casual and more RPG imo.

I swear that if I see many more "dual wielding is for ninjas/teens" statements, I'll write a topic exposing real-life dual-wield techniques that were popular around the world, from Asia to Europe, and from the muslims to the battles in Flandes.

Dual wielding is stupid and inefficient. Thats why I hate it.

then ....don't use it? I don't get the hate

you still have the oblivion shield/sword and 2h (only with more moves such as shield bash)

Did you even read my thread.. if they do it the way I proposed, it's far from being stupid. That's how pepole in real world use dual wielding.

I used to see a fencing tutorial video on how you use your left-hand dagger for blocking.

Did any of you read the way Bethesda is doing the whole dual wielding concept? It's really gonna add to the immersion and make being a spellcaster a lot more fun.

no I don't have the magazine. can you describe it? or can anyone describe it?

no one likes my idea :'(

What if you created a spell with lighting and frost effect, then had another hand that did fire and drain health? Sounds pretty awesome

It's not something you have to use, so there's no reason to cry about it.

Hehe, the spell in one hand, weapon in another thing makes me think of Bioshock 2. That system worked excellent.

@Deutschsland

I like your idea, but for I have read it won't be so realistic. It will be... well, typical fantastic dual wielding, at least with weapons. With magicka I'm happy.

Anyway, I don't complain because of dual wielding's inclusion... if it is realistic. Yes, you can fight with two axes (and this could be even interesting for berserk-like enemies)... but you will die in a veeery short time. The thing is that if they do unrealistic dual-wielding uneffective (as it would be in real life), a lot of people that think it's "cool" and that it makes their characters look "baddasses" would complain.

Only three buttons once you realize you can't block and attack simultaneously. Can't even do it with a shield. Since we had two block buttons in Oblivion (Alt/RMB), just switch one to attack2 and call it done for now.


Then let your enemies be inefficient. Personal rants about the game being stupid need to be taken up with Bethesda employees... in person.

As for the OP's configurations, I would bet real money on being able to block in all configurations.
Identical weapons = 2x damage against unprotected enemies, bad blocking (since no shield).
Mismatch weapons = Potentially two different attack lengths, two different weapon speeds, etc. Both for attacking, both for blocking.
Weapon and shield = Much better defense, one weapon. What more is to say? Shield bashing appears to be your attack with a shield instead of random bashing over a certain block level.

i think that your close but need to take a look at some real armed combat.
if there is any timed defense it would be a parry type move, also disarming would be nice to see.

a'lot of real fighting is dependent on breaking the opponents defense and maintaining your own.
dual wielding short swords or daggers would be nice for pure smothering speed and getting around an opponents defenses, but would really make you move a'lot because you dont defend well, you would need to evade and sidestep every attack with blocking as a last resort.
dual wielding maces would end up with you bludgeoning your opponent until he has no defense. once again you depend on movement as your defense, side-stepping and evasion tactics, but i could see maces being more defensive as well [never held one].
mixing weapons i wouldn't recommend, but then again we havent even SEEN anything except stills,
but parrying or trapping things of that nature, i wouldn't expect such finesse from this combat overhaul

they said that both weapons would be given animations and that they would be designed to where we can combine them in special moves. we will see how that goes.
i might try out the dual wield just to see how well it works.

why?

Sword in one hand and spell in the other still could mean "dual wielding" no? Or even shield in one hand and sword in the other, your still using two hands. This also could give lefty players a chance to actually play a character that wields a weapon in the left hand and a shield in the right. Weather if you're using shield in one and weapon in the other, or weapon in both, you're still using two hands.

Well I'm really keen on the idea that I will be able to use both hands, that doesn't mean that I have to dual wield weapons. I can see myself with a weapon in one hand and spell in the other, or a spell in each hand, this is actually the thing I'm most excited about. It's not just dual wielding weapons. Morrowind has been my favourite game ever so far, but having to switch between spell and weapon in combat was the worst thing about it, and the idea of being able to assign things to both hands (whether it be spells, weapons, weapon + shield, or a combination) is probably the thing I'm most excited about in all the info that's been revealed so far. I'm not going to dual wield weapons, but I will probably dual wield spells and I am looking forward to that!

I'm worried dual spells might diminish spell making for single spells.

Anyone else concerned?

I can see why you might be concerned given the lack of info about spellmaking at this point, but I can't think of any good reason why dual wielding spells and making your own spells would be mutually exclusive. I can't think of any restriction other than your ability to cast the spells wrt your magicka. Using both hands doesn't mean there won't be spellmaking, I honestly think you're being over-pessimistic in an "if they've added something they must have taken something away" manner, if that makes any sense.

well I think he probably suffered a lot of akimbo 1887 and akimbo G18 lol