Game has "vikings"

archery requires more dexterity than a sword. both need dexterity and strength.

back scabbards are not historical, but can be practical outside of traditional scabbards and sheaths

farming scythes were used as weapons

dual wielding was used, but it was generally a sword and dagger/short sword

Attached: 7576.gif (400x225, 1.44M)

>it's another 'Yea Forums pretends to be an armchair medieval combat historian like it's retarded faggot idol lindy' thread.

Spotted the french

no-one even hinted anything like that. these are just lazy unoriginal design troopes.

they want to make more classes then 2, (fighter and mage), and are not creative enough, so they go for this cheap shit. slip fighter into rogue/ranger/shadowfaggot give him backstab skill and say that for absurd reasons only he can shoot bow. Rather just make two classes then this shit again.

What's wrong with siege battles? I mean they usually just ignore some important shit like sapping & starving but it's just fine enuff

you mean "historical accuracy"?

You stand still when handling a bow, can you explain

>archery requires more dexterity than a sword
Objectively wrong. Archery requires you to do nothing that would be considered "dextrous" on its own. You need grip stability, drawing strength, and aiming skills.
Meanwhile, even the most basic sword fighting includes a degree of pirouettes and a level of hand to eye connection. The more advanced you go, the more complex it becomes. Simultaneously, sword fighting barely requires any strength. Endurance - sure, but strength "requirements" are marginal at best.
>back scabbards are not historical
Some of them are. Japanese had back scabbards.
I would assume, greatswords might've been carried around in back scabbards when horses were unavailable for some reason.
>dual wielding was used,
The thing about historical dual-wielding is that the off-hand weapon was usually as offensive as a shield would, sometimes less. As in "it was used offensively from time to time but it wasn't the main purpose". Dagger is a better defence against, say, swords, than a buckler while also being less cumbersome.
Whenever HEMA guys criticise dual-wielding they address the idea of using two swords/axes/spears with a purpose of "attacking more often" which was not really a thing. In those talks, examples of historical dual-wielding almost always surface up - the most prominent example being rapier + dagger combo.

>aiming skills
so dexterity

Attached: Capture.png (610x209, 13K)

It's historically unbelievably rare to take a castle by storming it.

>game has fire arrows

Attached: 1465133630792.jpg (1065x859, 76K)

>dance instructor larping as a historian

Attached: CA3C3B81-799E-49DC-8A0A-1573DB8B2F85.jpg (445x276, 25K)

So posture, stability, understanding of arrow's flight trajectory, movement anticipation. Literally has nothing to do with "dexterity".
You won't call aiming a catapult "dexterity" would you?
Sword alignment requires more "dexterity" because you work with more angles and have to twist your arm to match them - and even then it's more of a mechanical skill.

But it DID happen, and that makes for a way more interesting story to build a game on than "We sat outside of the walls for 8 months while everyone on both sides caught dysentery and starved to death."

No actual historians in the UK have heard of Lindy. There are few enough here that everyone mingles between circles and knows each other even just in passing, but Lindy's nowhere to be seen. He's an armchair historian who I'm sure picked up an audience by being english and sounding like he knows what he's talking about.

I assume you think they were naked crazy people roided up on shrooms, killing dozens of people while dual-wielding great axes.

What's with the last one? I recall him saying most battles were sieges

>Vikings where shit warriors guys

I'm laughing in Varangian Guard

>comparing raider formations to r&f troops
It's not the same tactics, not the same operations. But there's a reason why vikings were a pain in the bum for western europe, they were really fucking good.

Dragon's Dogma has none of this except maybe some torches, but most dungeons are pretty pitch black and require either your lantern or lighting the torches.

Torches on walls are fine, he just ignores anything that contradicts his clickbait video ideas. Sconces exist.

But why burn torches at night in corridors when you could just have a personal torch that you hold. If lighting at night was ever kept on in unused rooms it would be a temple, and everybody knows they use oil lamps. People shit on lindy for pointing stuff like this out, but the misinformed believe this stuff and real historians just go along with it in hopes of relevancy

was there really any point to this thread besides posting the same arguments and memes about this guy

So what you are saying is
>Bow = Str weapon
>Sword = Dex weapon

Well it beats just sitting outside of the castle for months until enemy starves or we're chased out by reinforcements as a game, now does it?

>game has magic
>game has multiple lives
>game has UI
>game has fun

Attached: 22936079-man-in-shock-just-got-very-bad-news.jpg (1300x1023, 102K)

>speaking up about autistic nitpicks
>never addressed the issue of female warriors

Attached: 1557380636742.png (640x960, 1007K)

check this fag out, falling for inbred Yea Forums tricks.

Current year historians are just erasing and rewriting history, not being one of them should be a pledge of honor

>main character has a secret backstory

Attached: lindy.png (854x529, 356K)

Stand still Frenchie

Attached: 1545042816569m.jpg (1024x576, 39K)

baldur's gate series has all that stuff i think, maybe not back scabbards. throne of bhaal has a siege

game of thrones recent episode made me think of lindy saying fire arrows are bullshit, especially in superwinter

>Game has dual-wielding spandaus

The hundreds of micro muscle movements you perform to keep the bow aimed steadily could be considered massively dex based

>reload with some ammo still in the clip
>it gets added to remaining ammo

Attached: 1553054009037.png (1000x683, 542K)

Oh boy, I can't wait to play your game where I have ability scores for "posture" "stability" "understanding of arrow flight trajectory" and "movement anticipation".

retard.

For me, it's the Pike and Shot

Attached: images(52).jpg (739x415, 69K)

No, Bows are Quality weapons
you need both STR and DEX to use them IRL
unless you are a fag and use a modern composite bow full of faggy pulleys

>>game has "vikings"
>>game has "berzerkers"
it is accepted historical terms though.

If we are to make abstractions, yes Bows are far more suited to be STR based weapons while swords are far more suited to be DEX based.
It's called "having expertise". Has nothing to do with dexterity especially how it's portrayed in games - which is the ability to do acrobatics/sleight of hand actions as in "not physically taxing yet highly complex". Meanwhile, basic archery is absurdly non-complex.
Expertise (skill level), Strength, Stamina - here you have it. Wisdom / Perception in some games too.

>game has horse archers

>really fucking good
The things in which they were actually good at were exploring and sacking monastaries and villages, neither of which involve actual competence in battle.

You mean a force that was chosen solely for that fact that they were foreign and therefore without loyalties rather than due to any actual skill? They weren't that successful anyway.

>understanding of arrow flight trajectory" and "movement anticipation".

those are both something you learn by playing the fucking game, retard.

Attached: received_309974346296497.jpg (720x444, 40K)

The most powerful man in the world has his bodyguard made up of pieces of shit whose only merit is that they're slightly more loyal than the next man? Come on, user, please try.

JUMP RAGNAR

Attached: jpg.jpg (349x500, 41K)

>game has both melee weapons and bows working their damage off strength
>nice and understandable
>but also guns
>wait what

How should dexterity be used in games? Theiving/agility?

>Become a literal demon to jump an inch higher once

Never said they were pieces of shit, they just weren't chosen for any exceptional skills.
Earlier Roman emperors did the same which is why the Praetorian Guard, despite being pretty mediocre was filled by Germans and other foreigners who had no ties to the Roman political environment.

>game doesn't have katana

Attached: 1537389246918.jpg (528x704, 20K)

>no fun allowed
kys faggot

All signs of a good game and historical accuracy. Keep seething.

Essentially. Strength affects things that require exerting force
>Lifting heavier things, drawing a stiffer bow, making a more powerful swing;
Dexterity affects things that require mechanical complexity and nimbleness
>stealing, compensating drops, moving quietly, aligning blades, fencing, rolling, evading blows.
And the combination of both is required for things that work of force applied to a proper form
>strong legs are required for running fast but won't do much without a proper running step form which is fairly complex. Same for jumping higher/further.
>properly thrown punch becomes more powerful the stronger the one who is throwing it is, however, it's the proper form which is again fairly complex that allows more muscle groups to be included into the punch.

Bows are DEX, Swords are STR. Deal with it fags.

>game has peasant militia armed with scythes

Attached: 1534652552208.png (448x372, 315K)

If he said that he's retarded most battles back in the day ended because you found the enemy king hiding in a ditch after you ran off his army

How would aiming be more reliant on strength than dexterity?

it's more DEX than STR. I've used a bow IRL and it wasn't that hard and the bow it wasn't modern but rather rudimentary.

>game has machine guns
>the spandau is better than the bren

Attached: 1534937653616.jpg (1024x1004, 60K)

I imagine a fire arrow would make the same damage as a normal arrow since it there wouldn't be any fire on it by the time it reaches its target.

Drawing a bow requires physical strength

>game has torches on walls
???

How would it be ANY reliant on dexterity? At least strength allows you to hold your bow steadily.
The real strength requirement of bows is the draw strength which will simply prevent you from using certain bows at all if you aren't strong enough. Bows can go (considerably) above 100 pounds in draw weight.

Based and lindypilled

>I've used a bow IRL
There are many sorts of bows, user. Ranging from 50 pounds to 180 pounds.
There are more things going on when you're using a sword compared to using a bow.

What exactly had you to do with the bow that required dexterity?

I have literally shot fire-arrows with pitch and they work more often than not. You fire a full volley of them into a fort, preferably where you can see there is flammable material (like a hay roof), and if only 1 in 10 catch, that's enough to start a fire.

Not that much, though. You need dexterity to hit the mark and for aiming.

>dexterity (noun): 1. readiness and grace in physical activity 2. mental skill or quickness

Manipulating the bow, aiming, and hitting the mark.

Who is the underage that keeps making these threads and watching this fucking citation needed mongoloid? He literally said that bullets do more damage when you use a tripod. Stop worshiping and parroting e-celebs you stupid children.

Attached: 1555920053794.png (629x1173, 131K)

Nothing of which has anything to do with aiming. Especially a bow.
>not that much
Go ahead, try using a 110 lbs longbow in combat and see how it doesn't require "much" strength.

>Not that much, though
Wrong

There's a reason English Longbowmen had a different skeleton to the average person

>three out of four party members come back for the sequel

Attached: lindybased.jpg (1102x1200, 176K)

Manipulating the bow is holding it steadily.
Aiming is aiming - it's a simple process of knowing where will the arrow go when you release it - it's based on knowledge and perception and has literally nothing to do with dexterity.
Hitting the mark is a result.

Literally nothing of what you've said requires "dexterity". Firing a bow on a run, without proper form, etc. do require dexterity, but it isn't the fundamentals of using the bow - it's advanced stuff. The same way that being stronger allows for more powerful sword strikes, but the fundamentals have close to zero strength requirements and are all about proper swing form, edge alignment, and fencing.

what's with all these alignment images recently

Attached: 1556257497577.jpg (600x648, 75K)

>Bows
STR is only a prerequisite. DEX determines your skill with a bow, assuming your STR is high enough.
>Scythes
As a peasent, it's that or the shovel.
>Dual weilding
There are historical manuals by fencing masters detailing ways to fight with dual weapons. Everything from espada y dagga, to rapier and dagger, even rapier and rapier.

>110 lbs
>lbs
I don't use the retarded measurement system so I don't know how much is that.
>combat and see how it doesn't require "much" strength.
In this context strength would be nothing without the proper coordination of the bow and your target. Not sure what that's called. If you target is standing still and one meter away from you then sure, dexterity is useless. Otherwise, you need the skill to hit the mark.

Lindybeige is based you stupid faggot.

There is pop culture associated with them, they were still real though. Pirates aren't fake just because there are myths surrounding them. If any part of Norse culture deserves to be called out on being fake, it's shield maidens, which is a myth made by Swedish feminist historians.

He's an angloboo dance instructor, there is nothing based about him

"110lbs" is the draw weight of English longbow from the times when they used pounds to measure weight so it's fitting. You, meanwhile, will die a retard as you can't even ask Google to convert it for you.
That being said, it's about 50kg.
>strength would be nothing
Strength would be a "requirement". You won't be able to draw the bow if you don't have sufficient strength. Knowing how to use it and how to aim it is "skill" or "expertise" - something you get from training with the weapon. You can take the best magician/thief/acrobat in the world and all his "dexterity" will do literally nothing for him for using a bow properly - he'll have to train with it anyway.

Dumb euro poster

>Aiming is aiming - it's a simple process of knowing where will the arrow go when you release it - it's based on knowledge and perception and has literally nothing to do with dexterity.
Not many people can do this. You're talking as if it was a given. "Just aim bro xD". In most games using a bow means using it in battle, while being chased or while chasing something. Both require you shooting moving targets. In this cases the strength needed to draw a bow should be a basic requirement while the dexterity to aim and hit on your mark is necessary, otherwise you're just shooting like an idiot.

Except the praetorian guard was notorious for killing emperors for money or political reasons

Attached: 1555150508856.jpg (1222x759, 133K)

let's see YOU sack a monastery

Actually it's based on the historical example of a Viking Woman ruining a colony in the new world by pissing off the locals.

I feel like Yea Forums is pretty harsh towards Lindy. Most of the time he's either reading someone else's direct account or specifies that's something is his opinion.
It's quite rare he says something is objective fact while being completely wrong.
The fire arrows thing is not saying they didn't exist but that they weren't a great idea and used nowhere nearly as much as Hollywood makes out

Was it even worth it to sack some Benedictine kiddy diddlers in bumfuck nowhere? What would you take with you? Beer? Books? Faggy illustrations of snails fighting dogs with swords?

Freydis Eiriksdottir? I don't see what she has to do with shield maidens.

>game is anything but a blob of peasants with spears
MUH ACCURACY

Attached: HERESY.jpg (373x373, 160K)

She's the basis of Shieldmaiden mythology, which like all romancing of the vikings, started around the victorian period.

in abandoned dungeons

constantly lit

>while the dexterity to aim and hit on your mark is necessary
Aiming has literally nothing to do with dexterity, I just explained that to you.
People who can't aim - they are not "clumsy" - they:
a) Can't hold the bow steadily - has nothing to do with dexterity as it relies on strength and endurance;
b) Can't judge the arrow trajectory - has nothing to do with dexterity as it relies on experience (as in "practical knowledge"), and perception (as in "judging the fucking wind");
b.2) Assuming the target is moving - can't predict the movement - which has nothing to do with dexterity and is solely based on combat expertise.

Not to mention, no, you don't fucking shoot your bow while chased - that's retarded. If you're chased as an archer you had already failed. Your ability to do something in this position is not really expected from you as your job is to stand still and hit shit far away.

You're talking a little out of your ass here buddy, but I get your point at least

>Knowing how to use it and how to aim it is "skill" or "expertise" - something you get from training with the weapon.
We're talking games. Bows are used in fights and battles, not when your target is an inanimate object. You need the skill to hit on your moving target, and that skill is closer to DEX than to STR. Although I have to admit it's a bit of a mix of both. RPGs are based on the premise that the strength needed to draw an bow is a prerequisite, instead of a requisite.
>you can take the best magician/thief/acrobat in the world and all his "dexterity" will do literally nothing for him for using a bow properly - he'll have to train with it anyway.
No shit. There are many kinds of dexterities.
I'm Mexican. inb4 racist slurs and prejudices. I've heard them all.

oh gotcha

>is British
>proud of his country
wtf is wrong about that, you self-hating nerd?

since this is an e-celeb thread, may i ask what the sticky is about?

I didn't say that they were good, only the reasons for which they were chosen, also their murders were rarely poltical but instead almost always for money. Another example would be Sultan Ismail of Morocco who had a bodyguard comprised of blacks from the sub-sahara only because they were not connected to any arab/berber rivals

>be British "historian"
>talk about other countries' history constantly
>let your bias prevent you from doing a good job

some guy named projared

>No shit. There are many kinds of dexterities.
And we are talking games where there's only one.
And when the mix of pretty much all dexterities doesn't do shit for "aiming a bow" while your everyday strength does do something, I feel it's safe to assume strength is more suited to be the main attribute for the weapon. Your assumption on "bow accuracy is tied to dexterity" is based on the fact bows are presented as "nimble and dextrous" weapons in media when they really aren't - basically, you're judging it in reverse.

Accuracy as a concept being tied to a dexterity is questionable in some scenarios - like shooting bows, but not others - like swinging a sword.
S.P.E.C.I.A.L. system, for example, dedicates Perception as your "accuracy" attribute - not dexterity.
Most importantly, should strength be "bow's stat" or not is up to debate, after all being stronger won't allow you to "deal more damage with your shots" however it'll absolutely allow you to shoot more, shoot more accurate, and use heavier bows which do absolutely "deal more damage". So at very least, all bows should have a strength requirement - not a dexterity one.

>b) Can't judge the arrow trajectory - has nothing to do with dexterity as it relies on experience (as in "practical knowledge"), and perception (as in "judging the fucking wind");
>b.2) Assuming the target is moving - can't predict the movement - which has nothing to do with dexterity and is solely based on combat expertise.
And after you gain the experience, skills, and expertise with an object you're controlling with your hands and using your mind to perform tasks while manipulating it, then congratulations, you're dexterous with that object.

I'd take the shovel, how the fuck would you even wield an actual scythe? the sharp part is on the inside and it's designed the be aimed downwards. At best you'd be cutting the opponents ankles whiles they're stabbing you with a sword or spear.

>Falling for the str/dex duality

Actually, in a way both are inseperable from each other, you need one to do the other and vice versa,
Its more of a spectrum more than anything.

>you're dexterous with that object.
In a whole other meaning that would a "character's attribute in a game" have, as it affects everything and not just a specific object.

don't know the name thankfully, thanks
thought it'd be something political since that's pretty much the only thing that whips mods into action these days

>S.P.E.C.I.A.L. system, for example, dedicates Perception as your "accuracy" attribute - not dexterity.
That's the one from Fallout, right? Yeah, I think that's more accurate a term. You've convinced me, user.

>weren't chosen for any exceptional skills.
I think you have a wrong view of military history if you think that matters much. Triarii doesn't mean you're a level 100 fighting God for example. It just means you're a veteran and you have the best gear. Varangians also had experience and expensive gear. It's really all that matters.

Are you sure? Some of those insults must have been in english

user, everyone in the argument understands that.

He cucked a guy called Game Grump Ross or something if that makes it more interesting for you

Projared, some shitty AngryVideoGameNerd rip-off cheated on his wife with the wife of another youtuber, RubberRoss(GameGrumps) and sent nude pics to random girls, including 16 year olds.

I suppose it's an umbrella definition, not a specific one.

Just fucking with you bro, no bad blood, im irish and ive got my fair share of racism round here. Good on you for being a reasonable human being

Attached: 12F3FFE8-9BC2-4C27-BDE0-0242918ADF6C.jpg (500x530, 49K)

doesnt look like it, unless its "my definitions are better than yours" kind of discussion.

What would be the correct term? Manual ability/power = MAN?

Do you think people here actually believe the world operates on a video game stat system? We all know you can't have drooling retard level of intelligence and also have the charisma to smooth talk everyone for example.

Only if it's unavailable for women.

you're so retarded it hurts

Some faggot youtuber who plays video games cheated on his wife and someone leaked some of his dick pics or some shit.

practice

I like to think not, but theres a lot of retarded people here.

charisma and intelligence are different things, though.

Depends on what period and whether or not help could be expected for the defenders. If another army was expected to lift the siege, the attackers' options would be limited to waiting and fighting in the field at a disadvantage, retreating, or taking the fortress by force. The latter of these three was less common than retreating, but far from rare. It was especially common for the Romans to do this as well as early gunpowder era Europe to seize fortresses. It was uncommon in medieval Europe unless you count the crusades in which case it happened basically every time. Sieges tended to end in retreats or surrender after about the early 18th century (beginning of the "limited wars" period)
t. historian (although not a military historian, I've had a decent amount of exposure)

>game has torches on walls
What's inherently wrong with this one?

It is but you need some intelligence to have the brain power to manipulate people

fair enough

>game has scythes as weapons
This is my fetish yet no fucking game uses them

I think he means torches in abandonded places, not the ones currently being inhabited.

No.

>This is my fetish
you put scythes up your ass? how's this a fetish?

Ah, alright. I thought I'd have to autism-retcon something in my pen and paper setting.

>I DON'T LIKE FUN WHY CAN'T GAMES BE MORE REALISTIC LIKE MY MILSIM GARBAGE REEEEEEEEE

Unless they're level 1 peasant weapons, they shouldn't either

>most powerful man in the world
delusional byzantine

Will this bullshit finally put a ban on eceleb threads and twitter screencap threads?

Question wasn't whether berserkers existed, just questioned what you thought they were.

That was a wholesome dialogue, I enjoyed it. Thank you, user.

You mean war scythes or wheat scythes?

War scythes are heavily underrated, normal wheat scythes are just edge symbols, useless as weapons.

basado y pastilla roja.
que el tercio marche por siempre

I've read sagas, in them they are villains. There's also the distinction between being a berserker and berserkgang. One is someone who has dedicated his life to basically being an asshole and a nuisance, while the other is a hardcore act during the heat of battle that vikings look up to.

Eat shit, spainfags.

Attached: Elizabeth_I_(Armada_Portrait).jpg (1200x962, 377K)

Attached: 1544884450640.png (500x500, 44K)

Rule of cool > tryhard /k/ wannabe faggotry

Attached: FE6_Berserker_Critical.gif (185x123, 1.07M)

So you've actually never read anything relating to actual historical vikings and just spew pop culture.

lmao, Egil's saga is pop culture? Go ahead and enlighten me then with these historical texts

>game has bows that require DEX instead of STR
At a certain point strength is meaning less for an archer.

>dual wielding berserker is the best character in the game

The fact that you think berserkers were people who went into some kind of a battle fury and were actually thing tells me enough.

I never said I believed in going berserk, we don't live in a fantasy world. What I said is true though, there were berserkers (which translates to Bear Shirt) wandering around Scandinavia and "going berserk" was something vikings believed could happen and you were awesome if you did it.

Don't make him out to be some total buttsquirt who only rides his accent to regurgitate pseuds' opinions back to them. He's entertaining, that's it.

No, you're good with it. Predicting movement has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with sleight of hand.

What are stirrups?

Nothing wrong with dual wielding, samurais did it all the time. Siege battles are a real thing too

I give up. You're obviously far too gone into retardation if you actually think that's what being a berserker was. Stop watching Japanese cartoons for your history.

thats what makes it so good tho
he talks about history through such a glaring bias it becomes funny

Yeah, 'cause Japs were too fucking retarded to ever figure out what a shield is and how it's immensely more effective than dual wielding.

>>game has bows that require DEX instead of STR
why would you use a bow if you have parkinson's disease?

What? No please explain to me what a berserker was then. I genuinely want to know, because so far all you've done is say "you're wrong" but never once make a correction or said a fact of your own.

Also, like I said, I read actual norse sagas (and history books) for my information. Not cartoons. I want to know where you got your info that is so different from mine.

How about a Norse professor explains it to you
youtube.com/watch?v=_EyxlktknTE

>>game has "vikings"
>>game has "berzerkers"
>>game has bows that require DEX instead of STR
>>game has back scabbards
>>game has scythes as weapons
>>game has dual-wielding
>>game has torches on walls
>>game has siege battles
what game is that?

I love Lindy. He is so meme-able

Attached: 6NkzjRH.png (900x1151, 1.24M)

>being purposely as vague as humanly possible as to what a berserker actually was

Attached: 1488383609991.jpg (192x250, 4K)

This was meant for

historyfags are completely insufferable

Attached: 1392618267680.jpg (250x250, 43K)

>Missing all the juicy historical shitposting.
*Laughs in latin*

Attached: 1546313250080.jpg (2480x5024, 3.61M)

you're being baited bro.

>your waifu a shit
lost it

No bard/dancer?

That's a nice and accurate depiction of yourself on the left.

seething redditfag
imagine how you smell when you're desperately trying to convince people to give a shit about historical battles

Attached: 1430754611614.gif (518x500, 1.3M)

not lore friendly

>not lore friendly
to lindy?

Yeah. The others are all good fits, but that? Come on.

It pleases me that this picture exists.

Ah, I did not catch your sarcasm before