[PROPOSAL] Matched animations in combat

[Denco]

So I have a small proposal for the team. Upon discovering a mod for Rome 2 called Medieval 2 TW - Classic Battles ( removes matched combat animations ) I've got an idea which worked quite well in Vanilla Rome 2. The idea was using the mod above as a base to set matched combat percentage to 100 and because all of the matched combat animations were removed it ended up making every soldier die with an animation. That's right no more soldeirs dying because of a sudden heart attack. I can't believe how better the game felt ( at least for me ) and I've been trying hard to replicate this for DeI mod but with little luck.

Anyway I posted this thread in hopes of you guys adopting this idea ( try to test it your self before making a conclusion), but if not it was worth a try.

[Ritter-Floh]

After DeI 1.05 is released, i will hard work on the animations part (different animations for romans and barbarians and i will integrate your ideas about matched combat as well) But after more than 100 createted units for 1.05, i need a few days break...

[Denco]

After DeI 1.05 is released, i will hard work on the animations part (different animations for romans and barbarians and i will integrate your ideas about matched combat as well) But after more than 100 createted units for 1.05, i need a few days break...

This is great news Ritter. Iv'e tried for a week before giving up but I'm sure that a man with your skills can achieve what I tried and a lot more.

[Garensterz]

The idea was using the mod above as a base to set matched combat percentage to 100 and because all of the matched combat animations were removed it ended up making every soldier die with an animation. That's right no more soldeirs dying because of a sudden heart attack. I can't believe how better the game felt ( at least for me ) and I've been trying hard to replicate this for DeI mod but with little luck. ( try to test it your self before making a conclusion), but if not it was worth a try.

By this idea, will you still be able to see soldiers gang up on one soldier all at the same time?

[Denco]

If my submod would work than no because you have to disable the secondary attack chance to make all the soldiers die using the animation. You can leave the secondary attack chance enabled and they would, but the ones died while being ganged up would die without animation.

I rather have soldiers dying with animations than having secondary attack enabled ( ganging up ). But I also realize that mods are not made exclusively for me so I'm sure that DeI and AE team can find a middle ground ( by leaving the secondary attack enabled or some other means )

[Sheridan]

It's a reasonable request and something we'll be looking into. Though I do think that, if possible, it would be nicer to keep the secondary animations but replace them with more advanced animations such as slashes or cuts, rather than only stabbing motions. Forgive my memory here, but it's correct that even maces and axes use stabbing motions as secondary attackers?

[Denco]

Forgive my memory here, but it's correct that even maces and axes use stabbing motions as secondary attackers?

Not sure my self.

[Garensterz]

It's a reasonable request and something we'll be looking into. Though I do think that, if possible, it would be nicer to keep the secondary animations but replace them with more advanced animations such as slashes or cuts, rather than only stabbing motions. Forgive my memory here, but it's correct that even maces and axes use stabbing motions as secondary attackers?

Yeah I agree, the secondary stab animation doesn't actually fit, but the replacement of a slash animation would be very appropriate because when soldiers die from a secondary attack they always go for a twirling death animation ( like we see in the power rangers fights XD) like simulating a powerful slash to them. Then again, let us all wish for it to be possible.

[LawL_LawL]

I'd be surprised if CA did it intentionally, but I can see strong reasoning for why stabbing/thrusting animations are the only kill animations. The depth of strike required to be immediately fatal or inflict a mortal wound which would cause irresistibly incapacitating (something you can't possibly "tough out" that results in unconsciousness or loss of bodily functions) effects and death soon after simply isn't achievable with slashing/hacking weapons that disperse the energy of the strike over a wide area. The neck and uncharacteristically deep abdominal gashes would be the only exception to this.

And this isn't mere conjecture, it's a well documented fact that combatants struck by slashes and cuts have a far higher survival rate and much lower hindrance to their fighting capacity at the time compared to combatants struck by thrusting/piercing weapons. It comes down to blood loss, trauma, then temporary wound cavity transitioning into resulting wound cavity, of which thrusting weapons or any kind of attack with a smaller area of contact (a single point as opposed to the length of a blade) is more likely to inflict the crucially required critical depth of 2.5cm-3cm. Anything less will fail to strike organs, major arteries, and result in significantly less-lethal tissue damage and comparatively minor blood loss (as opposed to deep gashes that result in significant blood loss and require much more work to tend to in order to even save the combatant). While there are major arteries present and somewhat close to our extremities that, if struck, can be severely inhibiting further limb function and poses a mortal risk if the artery isn't pinched shut, the likelihood of a cutting strike landing on, say, the inner thigh and opening the femoral artery is significantly lower than the likelihood of a spear thrust being deflected and piercing the leg to strike the same area. Again exceptions lie with areas like the neck, as well as the aforementioned inner/back of the thigh, where slashes have the potential but are far less frequently found to be inflicting injuries in such regions. For obvious reasons...

Besides this, I've hated the slash/cutting death animations from basically any game I've ever played. They always result in that action movie spin-into-fall death that is as pitiful as the vomiting animations appear to be from videos.

Just another perspective on the matter. But also worth noting that if the removal of secondary strike death seriously alters the balance of the game, ie higher stat units find it far easier to overpower lower tier units due to the lack of secondary strikes, it may end up being necessary to balance around it or not have it implemented if balancing is an objective.

[Sheridan]

That's a new, informative take on it. Well, I'm not surprised that thrusting motions with pointy sticks are more powerful based on the energy impact they deliver on a very small area, but the other documentations are new to me. This raises a new debate with regards to balance. I'll see if I can return with some points tomorrow, it's getting late here.

[Draewn]

My one issue with that kind of logic is that historically slashing / cutting optimized weapons were used, heavily. While I will happily grant that mass-weapons like an axe or pick have high enough energy and small enough striking surfaces to "count as" a thrust for your purposes, many societies used swords that were predominantly useful / used for the cut, rather than the thrust, and designed (weight balance wise and so on) to suit. In general when the reasoning-based explanations for how things work start to directly counter-indicate the actual practice, one should take them with a bit of salt.

My suspicion would be that - A: based on the various test cutting type videos about the internet, swords biting deep enough in an unarmored target to brutally incapacitate isn't unlikely at all and B: most slashing swords were meant to fight unarmored targets, or in the expectation of causing painful but not lethal wounds to an armored target (IE: for two mail armored knights to fight until someone is 'beaten', taken and ransomed).

Edit, Addendum: That, and whether a weapon causes ultimately lethal wounds seems rather tangential to the actual disabling capability. A good cut in the arm deep enough to rend muscle and clip bone is the sort of thing I very much doubt people would keep fighting after, whether or not they were actually in danger of bleeding out or the like, to say nothing of 'little' things like nasty hand injuries or the like (which I'd gotten the impression from my reading of comments by HEMA types are actually rather common places to hit, even with later period weapons featuring elaborate hilts).

[Broreale]

Wouldn't this potentially ruin melee combat? Secondary animations are much better than some of Rome 2's ridiculous motion captured animations besides, and with them removed you go back to Roman legionnaries abandoning their shields and going into fencing matches with barbarian botroas. Yeah the secondary animations are dull, but the normal ones made vanilla Rome 2 look like a hot mess when it was released. I just don't know what you plan on replacing these animations with.