I wonder how fine grain the weapon and combat model is in Oblivion? - The stats visible on user level are thin. For instance, a steel short axe and an iron double blade axe have the same combat value, say "2". Will they fight differently (against various types of targets)? Or is a club of 2 causing different damage than a sword of 2? - If there is any interesting real on the underlying combat model of the game, it would interest me. Thank you!

As far as combat damage goes 2 is 2 whatever the source. Reach, weight and speed effect game-play to a degree but essentially the different weapon types are only there for role-playing purposes.

This depends on your character to some extent. Like if your character is skilled with a sword to Journeyman level, but still a novice with blunt weapons, he or she will be able to use the sword in a greater variety of ways (not trying to post spoilers here, but you get the point). This goes for pretty much any skill in Oblivion, once you reach a certain level with that skill, you'll have the freedom to do more things with that particular skill.

I heard somewhere blunt gains a small bonus to undead or at least skeletons??
How true I'm not sure, but shock effects spirits and daedra, fire zombies, trolls and skeletons.. so maybe weapon types do have a small variation depending on foe?

This is an interesting topic, and I think the Oblivion people has made a major oversight here. I played Mount&Blade Warband before I switched to Oblivion, and the M&B combat system is far superior to TES'. In M&B all weapons do different dmg, i.e. blunt, piercing, cutting and all armors absorb dmg differently, so that a chain mail for instance provides a lot of defense against slashing and cutting weapons such as swords but not so much against blunt weapons. That makes you have to consider your choice of weapon when you go to battle.

All weapons also have specific speeds and lengths, which I think they do to a certain extend in Oblivion as well, only you can't see it.

Besides, I find it pretty lame that my 2h axe does less dmg than my short sword...

I guess the advantage that silver/enchanted/daedric weapons have over 'normal' weapons is worth a mention.

Meh.

I dont think ruleset details count as "spoilers".

At least I never felt bad of studying the ruleset of a game in detail before playing.

Saves you the hassle of having to restart because you misunderstood how the ruleset works and seriously misskilled your character.

That's the problem with spoilers though, until you post you don't know if someone will be annoyed so some take the safe approach.

That M&B idea is extremely old. I've seen it in MUDs in the early 90s. Also, I dont think its THAT bright and certainly not "far superior" as a game concept. Its just having to choose from different weapons for different occasions. In Oblivion, you have the same if you enchant your weapons and need to choose the right weapon enchantment for the given opponent.

Its btw also not realistic. Blunt weapons like warhammers actually only became popular after the invention of plate armor. Thats because before that point they didnt had important advantages over the sword.

Its actually plate mail where unbalanced weapons like the warhammer became important weapons, since a normal sword cant do much to penetrate a plate armor. All you can do is trying to hit the gaps.

I'm not saying it's new, I'm saying it works better for 1st person melee.

I'm not getting into the historical implementation of various armors and weapons as this is fantasy and it's completely irrelevant, but it's a basic physics fact that sharp instruments are not very effective against a chain armor which is flexible. A heavy blunt instrument on the other hand will hurt a lot if your armor is flexible. M&B had to incorporate all that as there's no magic. Just because there's magic in Oblivion I don't see any reason to slack off on the melee combat. When all the stats your weapon has is 'Damage: 2' there should at least be some difference between a short sword and a 2h battle axe. No? In my opinion a more advanced combat system would only add to the gaming experience, particularly if you're playing a pure fighter.

While agreeing that Oblivion's combat system could be more interesting your last statement seems to miss the importance of skills and materials. If like is compared with like (same material, same skill level in blade and blunt) then your 2h axe does do more damage than your shortsword. I don't find it unrealistic that someone skilled in blade but not in blunt should do more damage with a blade, all other things equal.

So the listed damage for your weapon includes your skill bonus with that weapon?? That's...weird. That makes it pretty hard to compare weapons, doesn't it? I'm still learning the Oblivion system so maybe I'm missing something, but this seems like like fail...It would be nice to have some extended information on your weapons (and spells too for that matter). Like a base damage and then a (+2) if your skill adds that much. Doesn't seem like that would be too much to ask.

TheNiceOne's http://www.tesnexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=31855 shows extended information. Oblivion works more like a weapon has x damage and then your skill lets you use a percentage of that value. The higher your skill, the more you get to use. Display Stats shows the full value regardless of skill level.

Cool, ima try that. Thanks.

Speed of attack, weight of the weapon, damage dealt and fatigue level also have an impact.

A warhammer is the most likely to stagger a foe but is slow to swing, a dagger is faster but less likely to stagger.
Add in drain fatigue and drain agility effects, each weapon has different effects outside of direct damage.

My last orc used both weapon sets, against mages a fast short sword, against warriors a warhammer as each type was more effective dependant on his enemies combat style.

I thought hand-to-hand was the only fatigue draining attack outside of magic/potions/enchantments?

No I meant fatigue level is related to stagger, the lower fatigue you have the easier it is for you to get recoiled back when struck, Sorry I have trouble putting points across sometimes.

You're not alone there In any case you have reminded me that low fatigue reduces the weapon damage you can inflict.

So we conclude there are various types of factors to calculate combat damage but nothing for the physical type of the weapon itself. Indeed this looks like a major oversight if you consider how thorough the game is tailored for the rest and that combat-in-dungeons is the only real game content (I'm a bit sadly saying this) .

In morrowind they had different values of damage depending on how you swung a specific weapon.
I.e a spear would cause 10 - 20 pts when thrust, but 5 -8 when swung ( not a real data set btw just an example ).

That said Morrowind was more true to P&P rpg rule systems, Oblivion was a more user friendly game for new bloods, console users and fps fans imo.
With a drastric improvment to graphics coming first, still one of the most fantastic games but lacked focus when it came to implementing some ideas.

Lol, yes, the Graphic Daedra of modern game development doesn't really pay off! Because, when you think of it, graphical status of a game is necessarily waning over time, but not so its game complexity and logical design. So the real fame comes from the latter, imho. - Just imagine that some people are still playing Pharaoh these days!

The combat mechanics are pretty simplistic like mentioned above, but it's probably worth noting that the feel of combat has improved a lot in oblivion over older games and other games. I love the way archery works in oblivion. If feels very natural (which I like) even though I know the damage I inflict is calculated on a few simple variables and has nothing to do with where I hit my enemy or with how much velocity, etc.

TES games will always be primarily role playing games and are not intended to be combat simulators per se, but still, it would be nice to see more refinement in the combat model for the next game with more realism. I would love to get a different result depending on whether I hit my opponent in the neck as opposed to hitting him in the big toe.

And another thing, if oblivion really was a “combat simulator,” this forum would be totally taken over by grognards endlessly debating historical accuracy and physics . . . i mean, oh my god, if your not factoring in the strength of the attacker's right arm based on how many hours of training multiplied by a 0.0311 factor of the attackers blood glucose level determined by the caloric value of the gruel he ate that morning minus the percentage intensity of his indigestion added to a factor of his current flatulence level, then how can you possibly pretend to accurately model the impact velocity and force of the blow of his correctly modeled Viking axe from the 960’s (but not the much different model starting in May of 969 AD) as it strikes at a 63.5 degree angle against the reinforced historically accurate Anglo-Saxon chainmail armor of the opponent’s left elbow?!?!?!

Okay, I’m a little prone to sarcasm, but honestly, that’s not much of an exaggeration. Really. I used to play Combat Mission (CMBO, CMBB, and CMAK), a WWII “tactical simulator” (I kept telling my wife that, but she never stopped calling it “that stupid game” I play, oh well). These kind of debates would go on forever (except it would entail the air-speed-velocity of a shell fired from a M1A1 cannon hitting the 41 degree sloped armor of Panzer Vg44 tank at a range of 340 meter, etc.)

Based on archeological finds in the northern regions of Denmark in October 2008, I think you'll find that those Viking axes you refer to (which were actually also used in similar fashion by the Picts, making the term 'Viking axe' incorrect) were not introduced until the late fall or even as late as the early winter of 969. Just so we at least have the historic aspects straight.

Ha I know I sounded a J ass, I was just saying on a project with a time frame, upgrading from an older series engine you have to decide what gets worked on.
Many people may not have played the big O if in combat you swung a sword up close to a ogre and missed due to a %, and fresher graphics bring in new money so they focused on that.

After all I was not around on these forums when the big O was released, anyone care to comment how many fans of the game who raved about graphics being the only thing that thrilled them are still around today.
Or how many new fans for the big O or even 5 would play it if % die rolls were used as the main system rules, especially for combat?

Gwynwas I think you're right things are what they are, and since Beth is a stable game company we can presume they're doing things right.

There's a *slight* difference between modelling the effects of one's breakfast, and wanting a hit to somebody's entirely unarmoured head to produce slightly different results to their heavily armoured body.