Game has "vikings"

>play as british soldier
>forget the crouch button gets disabled
>get clobbered by a baguette swinging fr*g

Attached: 1545312497571.png (900x818, 470K)

>game has cavalry

>another butthurt britbong thread

>my suspension of disbelief requires me to believe that bows are drawn from your ability to dance like a faggot rather than draw the fucking bow

>game has flame arrows
Flame arrows exist

>game has horses (at all)
wut?

>game has spandaus instead of brens
This is true shit

>game portrays the french in a positive light
This. Fucking savages.

Attached: -cage-fire-head-medieval-style-arrowhead-9931-p.jpg (976x836, 193K)

I want to see angry Scottish trainer as Gun Jesus now.

Attached: forgottenweapons.jpg (299x299, 12K)

>game has battles
>doesn't mention logistics.
>doesn't mention supplies.
>doesn't mention scouts.
doesn't mention strategy.
doesn't mention troops condition.
>doesn't mention aftermath rape
>it's just a bunch a bunch of guys charging one against the other

>my suspension of disbelief doesn't allow me to enjoy anything because I am autistic.

>Game has "enemies"
>Game has "fun"
>Game is "hard"

Attached: 8415fe99d52fa8b123111a6826ccb317.png (650x366, 335K)

I'm retarded.
Why this shouldn't be the case?

>Games have trebuchets
>They cut the ropes

Attached: 1531901670860.jpg (1000x563, 48K)

He's in idiot. It does. Not completely silent, but sub sonic ammo combined with a silencer will greatly reduce the sound.

>duel-wielding

Attached: duel wielding.jpg (987x705, 81K)

you have never used a longbow i take it

Seriously though, why would you ever sacrifice the great feeling that you get from historical accuracy for something like "fun"?

They do make them a bit quiter, but its still fuckin loud if you are close to where the shooter is, also you would have to use sub-sonic ammo to not have the loud pop bullets have

>dual wielding is impractical meme

Not sure if you're aware of this motherfucker called Miyamoto Musashi, but he's probably one of, if not the greatest duelist in recorded history.

Guess how he liked to fight.

>game has siege battles
Wait, whats wrong with this exactly?
90% of all battles prior to firearms were siege battles

what does a duelist have to do with video games where you're always fighting for your life against multiple enemies, not in a ritual, regulated fight with rules

Because we're not dweebs.

Attached: 1502234638720.png (540x960, 84K)

With a single sword
He only dual wielded swords once, you retard

Did you learn this from videogames? You know you can just search for silent weapons firing on Youtube or something and you can literally hear the silenced shots echoing in the distance in many of them

>game was made in the west

Attached: no thank shota.jpg (1440x810, 137K)

>siege battles against a garrison of 10 men woooow

Attached: 1535402067557.webm (896x504, 2.63M)

Dancing around like a fagot is AGI though, not DEX.

Attached: Female_Hunter_(Ragnarok_Online).png (120x120, 7K)

Yes, because only using a single sword is why he created an entire fucking school of swordsmanship based around using two swords.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niten_Ichi-ryū

I did, and even if was tiring as fuck, developing strength isn't really difficult, it just takes time. The aiming and understanding wind and rain takes a lot of dexterity, and are the main feature of the bow. Heavy bows do require strength, but the dexterity needed is far superior.
I'd argue that swords are more about dexterity than strength, instead of bows being the opposite.

Did you not fucking read my post? I didn't say they completely silence the weapon, it only greatly reduces the sound of sub sonic ammunition.

But historical accuracy makes it more fun

Greatly reduced doesnt mean silent
It would still be very loud

Because silencers only dampen the sound and muzzle flash from the front of the gun, there is still the mechanism inside that isnt silenced

do you think bows had auto-aim back then? lol, consoles didn't even exist

Strength is used for being able to pull back the string of a bow, but dexterity is what makes you able to properly aim it, and being able to shoot fast.

>>game has horses (at all)
Okay I have to hear about this one

Even subsonic ammo sounds like someone slapping two wooden boards together. The sound is reduced, but its in no way something you wouldn't immediately notice. ESPECIALLY indoors.

>He's in idiot.
Unfortunately for both of us, I did read your post. Most of what it said was to be inferred from "between the lines" as they say

no that's perception

You do realise that "school" doesnt literally mean an academy right?
He invented a technique that he used once. Please dont be retarded

>strength should be a requirement for every weapon!
>this will make RPGs way more interesting!

I see your point, but I don't think you know just who Musashi Miyamoto was and just what he did. That fucker's entire philosophy was do whatever you had to do to survive in battle, which is why he started using two swords (he saw it as a waste to have it and not use it). He also used psychological warfare a bunch to unnerve or anger his opponents and throw them off balance.

Read the story of Musashi Miyamoto fighting (and fucking winning) against an entire sword school at once.

>Game has guns instead of longbows
>Guns make longbows pointless
>Admins refuse to listen to you to remove guns
>Keep making your soldiers use longbows anyways because 'Muh tradition'

Attached: 1245125863727.png (462x480, 274K)

youtube.com/watch?v=1uUk5WGAydI

If you stand near the shooter, you hear the loud explosion from the mechanism, but assuming you use subsonic ammo, and your target is further, hes not going to hear anything but the bullet hitting, as the super sonic boom is not present

>I did, and even if was tiring as fuck, developing strength isn't really difficult, it just takes time. The aiming and understanding wind and rain takes a lot of dexterity, and are the main feature of the bow. Heavy bows do require strength, but the dexterity needed is far superior.
What the fuck does that ecen mean? Dexterity is a video game stat you autist humans dont have "dexterity"
>I'd argue that swords are more about dexterity than strength, instead of bows being the opposite.
Thats the point that OP is making
You just owned yourself

He probably refers to what he said about them not used that much in medieval warfare as people think and that it was more likely that they would get scared and act random in the battlefield, which would be a constant risk, even though he never claimed that they were a stupid idea, or they shouldn't be in war entertainment media

Reminder that Lindybeige claims:

>no one used swords, axes
>no one used horses
>no one used throwing knives
>no one used double strap arm shields
>no one used scythes
>no one used mail coifs
>no one used torches
>Pikemen didn't fight each other
>no one spoke French during the French revolution
>no one spoke Latin during the Roman Republic
>battle of Zama didn't happen
>Romans carried one pilum
>Vikings weren't real
>berserkers weren't real
>climate change isn't real
>stagnant social mobility isn't real
>castles were defended by three soldiers
>butted mail is better than riveted mail
>operation market garden was a success
>Napoleon was literally Hitler
>The Churchill was the best tank in WWII
>The English won the Hundreds Years' War
>British naval guns on Malta could launch projectiles into space
>brodie helmets were superior
>English accents are superior
>English is the best language
>Normans weren't French
>imperial system is better
>dunkirk was a british victory
>british officers don't duck
>the bren gun was like a full auto sniper rifle
>boer concentration camps were refugee camps
>the French are German

I know that it doesn't mean an academy. It's also not just one technique. It was an entire style of swordsmanship, a SCHOOL, based on using two blades at once.

Stop arguing.

That's not what school means. user, please take your own advice

sounds based

Nigga what

Attached: 6a4.jpg (645x773, 61K)

dexterity refers to finesse, precission and the ability to handle a weapon in general, rather than something you could build up by lifting rocks, don't be a total retard, please, this thread is going well so far

>game cares more about realism than fun

Attached: 1531632900732.png (618x597, 312K)

ITT Yea Forumsirgins think they know more about history than a man with a degree in archeology

> x wasn't used much/often, insted people uses y most of the time
>OMG HE SAID IT WAS NEVER USED

Why do you retards only see everything black and white, do you even watch the videos?

what does AGI stand for?

>historical realism isn't fun

Attached: ugh.jpg (599x617, 30K)

MACHICOLATIONS!

>game exists

Attached: 1557114618480.jpg (428x469, 18K)

>game has crossover

Attached: 1525199189353(2).png (629x375, 42K)

glad you agree

Agitating your muscles in a rhythmical manner

Read your own article shithead
It was a school that INCLUDED two sworded technique
You obviously havent read his book, he didn't duel with two swords, he used it once against the Yoshioka clan

Yes it does you fucking retard read the wikipedia article
Its a style not a literal school that you go to and learn at

>spells "berserker" with a z

>Napoleon was literally Hitler
>british officers don't duck
>English is the best language
This is all true though

>Game doesn't have spears
>Game doesn't have shields
>Game has shields but they're just passive +DEF
>Game has spears but they have the same swing animation as swords

>Yea Forumstard decides what to play based on a buzzword

Attached: 1555594761776.png (1871x1080, 1.85M)

Not that guy but the stats in Ragnarok Online were

Str - strength (improves melee weapon damage and carry weight)
Agi - agility (improves dodging and attack speed)
Int - intelligence (improves spell power and increases your total mana resource named SP)
Vit - vitality (improves health)
Dex - dexterity (improves accuracy and ranged weapon damage, also improves/d casting speed)
Luk - luck (improves critical hit chance)

>if it's good I can't like it because it's for retards

Attached: 38085182_676280536078758_3707388346541015040_n.jpg (750x729, 58K)

This image is quite literally indisputable.

You're complaining in a board that propagates the retarded idea that you can only support one videogame platform. Think about that for a second.

>Yea Forumstard has no point and replies with off-topic bait
k thanks for the reply and try

The only retard here is you
>bows require strength
>but you can just aquire strength lol therefore it requires dexterity
fucking 60iq

when did I claim bows did not require strength?

If you had sex you wouldn’t even care about this shit

this unironically

>fun is a buzzword
Sometimes I forget this site is full of nothing but low quality bait and retards, here's your (you) faggot

Attached: 1556609540590.gif (500x700, 976K)

Why do people still think horses were used in battle?

you offering ;)

>no one used swords, axes
>no one used horses
He never claimed this
>no one used throwing knives
>no one used double strap arm shields
>no one used scythes (in battle)
All true
>no one used mail coifs
He didnt claim this, he said you didnt wear them without a cloth coif underneath
>no one used torches
On walls, which is true
>Pikemen didn't fight each other
>no one spoke French during the French revolution
>no one spoke Latin during the Roman Republic
He never claimed these
>battle of Zama didn't happen
He wrote a literal book about the battle you retard
But as for the purely historical evidence, there is basically none, so for all we know it didnt happen, all we have to go off is a myth
Its about the same level as the battle of Troy, it likely happened but we have no proof
>Romans carried one pilum
This is wrong if he ever claimed it
They carried two
>Vikings weren't real
>berserkers weren't real
This is true
>climate change isn't real
This is also true
>stagnant social mobility isn't real
Thats an oxymoron so, true
>castles were defended by three soldiers
>butted mail is better than riveted mail
>operation market garden was a success
No idea
>Napoleon was literally Hitler
Based Napoleon
>The Churchill was the best tank in WWII
Yeah thats a laugh

>Game has spears
>They are two-handed weapons only, no matter how big/small the spear actually is
>You swing the spear instead of stabbing it

>No one use horses,
Yes he did claim this, and the video is in this thread

You said they require more "dexterity", which isnt a thing. They require skill to aim sure, but that doesnt mean shit if you aren't strong enough to draw the bow 500 times in a battle.

Listen it's alright that you can't understand game design.

>Despite being reskinned longswords, they do 10% of the damage done compared to a longsword.
>You also take the same damage done for some reason.

The Churchill is his favourite tank, they are just misrepresenting him sperging about why he loves it

One handing spears is retarded

>being this triggered about the supremacy of anglos

you dont need to do it 500 times if you dont miss

>archeology degree somehow means you have immense physics and historical knowledge by association
Wrong.

and strength and endurance aren't the same thing. more strength may result in more endurance but so would more dexterity, finer controlled movements and less wasted energy and whatnot.

He has claimed it multiple times though
He ignores the fact that the German Panther was objectively better than any allied tank

Oh because he made a video wondering who the fuck thought it was a good idea to ride a horse into battle? He didnt claim noone did it, he made a video wondering what a crazy idea it was to train horses for battle

Dexterity is skill, you dumbass
And you're only talking about heavy bows, which again, still require more skill with the weapon than strength, since being able to shoot an arrow you can't aim properly is retarded
Historically archers trained every day, this built up their strength and skill equally. In the case of the most common bows, strength wasn't even a big deal.

Just stop.

>only talking about heavy bows
AKA the only bows ever used in war

sorry ur stupid enjoy ur fantasy

>implying bowmen aren't naturally adept dancers

>thinks bows require more "dexterity" than strength to use
>telling anyone they are living in a fantasy

>>game has torches on walls

This is perfectly historical

not true at all, there were light and heavy archers, and even light bows were effective at volleys, where the point was to aim at the gaps
heavy archers wouldn't be shooting 3 times a second, they would prepare on the order of a commander at specific times

Is this a problem for you?

Attached: this_is_a_bit_problematic.gif (240x160, 2.06M)

str = brute strength
dex = specialization

an archers muscle build where his back is ripped from pulling back all day aint gonna be good with a fucking polearm ok faggot

Name 3 examples where light bows were used in war.

does playing bass require strength? cause you need strength on your fingers, you know?

Attached: IMP.jpg (560x560, 26K)

You have never shot a warbow in your life if you think those are even remotely comparable, you're fucking stupid.
You wouldnt even be able to draw an english longbow once.

If vikings didn’t exist, then what about the Baltic Sea War?
Also berserkers can exist if you take into account hysterical strength

I've drawn several heavy bows, and it's tiring, sure... oh, and most of the times I missed the target, maybe I needed more accuracy obtained by training, aka skill, aka dexterity

You should see the arm/back muscles on an archer dude they are fucking massive

youtu.be/DSTvLAhLpgQ
Now please stop.

do your own research, but the mongols are the easiest example

Gotta show off them fancy critical hits somehow.
Seeing someone wind up with a giant sword and cleaving an opponent in two looks way more impressive than simply standing and shooting from afar.

Vikings didn't exist
They were nordic tribes, each independent
Calling nordic raiders colloquially "Vikings" was never done before the modern period

>dota under nu-fun
you are actually a brainlet

you really think that does prove anything?
three times I've said I never claimed bows didn't require strength at all. Read the whole thread again, this just got boring and pointless

>people unironically think scythes were weapons of war

I said name 3
Surely if it was so common you have plenty of examples right?

You claimed they require some nebulous definition of "dexterity" more than they require strength, which is just flat out fantasy rubbish. If you cant draw a bow during a battle because you lack the strength, or you cant aim it because you're shaking, then "dexterity" is utterly meaningless.

dude, what part of needing some degree of strength but more skill you aren't getting? I'm seriously thinking you need medical attention, and until you get checked this discussion is pointless

Manchu Bows are heavy tho

Attached: manchu.jpg (800x921, 138K)

Jesus, what an absolute retard. It takes a special breed of idiot to have all the facts learned well enough to make a lecture about it and still get it wrong.

Attached: Kosy_i_piki.jpg (1377x1645, 238K)

Meant to reply to , not . Sorry .
Not sorry to you though, .

>I don't know why things were as they were, but i know everyone else was stupid for millennia.
Quintessential anglo

I agree, but that basically still fits the general nomenclature, no? Vikings existed, they just didn’t call themselves Vikings.

>if I beat a scythe into a pike it means a scythe is an instrument of war

Yes but thats all that Lindy claimed
They weren't called Vikings, there was no Viking nation

Read the post 3 times if you have to, retard.
Bows do not require an enormous amount of skill to use. There were literally thousands upon thousands of archers in most medieval armies.

>There were literally thousands upon thousands of archers in most medieval armies.
I guess they didn't target practice everyday since they were 16 once in the military, huh

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_scythe
I win, you lose!

Attached: 502px-Polish_scythemen_1863.png (502x600, 264K)

>game has vikings and berzerkers
Viking is a modern catch-all term for Norse raiders who primary traveled by longboat. While it was dumb, there were many vikings who went into battle armorless
>bows use DEX not STR
This is mainly a game design thing, since it makes for more dynamic builds if not every weapon is based of STR. However, this has lead to most people thinking that archery is for skinny twinks and women.
>back scabbards and scythes
Both are blatantly incorrect, but it's okay as long as the game doesn't portray itself as historical.
>Dual wielding
It's like a homophone; dual wielding was almost exclusively used for duels and other one-on-one fights. This trope is okay as long as the game isn't an RTS or other army game
>torches on walls
Don't know about this one
>siege battles
Only a problem if the defending forces charges out of the gates. Medieval castes were superb defensive structures.

>prank man gets blown btfo'd out so he tries to snitch on weed jesus
what a bitch

You can literally learn to have near perfect aim in almost no time at all.
youtu.be/I3k6MQ-srzE

>Hand-eye coordination is for faggots and not required to hit a target, all u ou do is pull back aim at a 45 angle and let loose with hundreds of other arrows!

>beaten into a position where its actually positioned for combat instead of cutting grass
Thats like saying a fence is a weapon of war because the posts are shaped like spears

>Viking is a modern catch-all term for Norse raiders who primary traveled by longboat. While it was dumb, there were many vikings who went into battle armorless
Vikings didnt exist, and no they didn't. You're thinking of Gaullic and Germanic tribes in early antiquity who fought naked to scare their enemies, and even then it was more of a myth than reality.
>It's like a homophone; dual wielding was almost exclusively used for duels and other one-on-one fights.
When? Dagger and rapier? Was pretty uncommon.
>Only a problem if the defending forces charges out of the gates. Medieval castes were superb defensive structures.
True, but this did happen. See battle of Alesia.

>You can literally learn to have near perfect aim in almost no time at all
This is the dumbest thing I've read on a thread for the last week
Good luck trying to hit a target 200m away on a windy day after a month of everyday practice

Dumber than you claiming strength is less important than "dexterity"?
Lol
Good luck hitting anything while your twig arms are shaking holding a heavy poundage warbow

>t. the strong guy who shoots warbows all the time but never hits the target

Good argument. We all know that Ness is Sans

Also by Berserkers he doesnt mean naked men, he means naked men in a drug induced frenzy

>Muskets take 5 years to load for balance purposes

Go watch some Gary Chynne videos and educate yourself you petulant child

how do you not realise that the titles of his videos arent the exact content?
like at the 'Lets laugh at minorities!' its not the first thing you think when you see the title

kill yourself

Then who did Alfred the Great fight against? That's what I meant for dual wielding; even in one-one-one combat, it was still incredibly rare.
That makes sense, but the mental state of a berserker is generally just anger or magic in most places that I've seen.

>what does AGI stand for?
>what does AGI stand for?
>what does AGI stand for?

Attached: 1552587228444.jpg (1024x988, 159K)

youtu.be/s7TstDANPUc
Here, enjoy.

Have you player mount and blade? It has most of these things.

>he never claimed that they were a stupid idea
>it's literally in the title that "Cavalry was a stupid idea"
who should I believe hmmm?

Attached: 1531876017192.png (281x862, 203K)

he truly is based and redpilled

Your weak back muscles were trembling as you barely pulled the string back. That is why you missed ,faggot. Longbow men pulled hundreds of arrows a day , they were the most ripped soldiers on the battlefield.

Attached: 4340656000000578-0-image-a-18_1502722702700.jpg (634x625, 69K)

>no one used scythes
Except they were used. In Poland farmers brought their scythes to blacksmith to be reforged into primitive spears. It was cheap and easy way to make militia formation called "Kosynierzy".
>retard claiming all that shit is brit
color me surprised not.

Attached: 1543631458175.jpg (800x497, 122K)

>dexterity doesnt exist

Just when you thought you'd heard it all

Attached: 1556721346333.jpg (470x470, 31K)

swordsmen and bowmen require similar attributes but should have different skills

Now i miss when dark age of camelot was alive...thanks dick.

more than 200 videos showing his skills, but in ONE THIRD of a SPECIFIC video he talks about the importance of strength, and then he goes on the 2/3s of the video left talking about techniques and dexterity feats

yeah... totally a matter of strength

Last time I'm saying it. A bow requires strength, but it's a skill that has to be developed, thus dexterity is more important than strength.

Are you people retarded? It's clearly a clickbait title. Actually watch the video. He's saying people who decided to try to tame the horses ancestor were mad lads.

>reforged into primitive spears
so not scythes then

Nice reading comprehension.

it is STILL scythe. The word "Kosynierzy" even translates loosely to Scytheman. It's definitely not a spear.

I liked him when he made cool videos about medieval weapons and shit.
What made him go full autism nitpick mode?

From my homebrew system

>AGILITY: Nimbleness, grace and flexibility.

>FINESSE: Coordination, accuracy and precision.

Attached: 1488592588844.jpg (1632x975, 380K)

They were literally reforged into something thats no longer a scythe
Historically farmers also turned plows into spears but you dont say plows were weapons of war
People just have a weird hard on for scythes because of western depictions of death and edgy anime characters

>reforged into primitive spears
>It's definitely not a spear.

Attached: 1380766129306.jpg (675x756, 121K)

Dexterity feats which are possible by having strong hands,forearms,wrists just like he said in video.

He ran out of interesting content to talk about so he's grasping at straws.

>aim doesn't require dexterity

bigly mood

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_scythe
>People just have a weird hard on for scythes because of western depictions of death and edgy anime characters
Because westers depiction of "scythe" in combat is retarded compared to real ones
It fulfils the same function as polearm. Because you can use other types of polearm for the same task, it's already a spear?

fucking retards.

Attached: 1542239326329.gif (480x358, 1.14M)

time to cope

>no arguments
thank you for your cooperation

>reforged into a primitive spear
>fulfils the same function as polearm
You're saying a bunch of shit that doesnt sound like scythe to me

end of thread

Attached: reality.png (594x693, 26K)

>it takes 0 strength to swing a sword
come on now

Believe in what you want tard, war scythe thing is well documented.

Attached: 1549033207744.jpg (500x409, 108K)

if you do the swing correctly, you can redirect it using the same force, making you waste less energy, and it's a million times less tiring than pulling back the sword on each strike like a brainlet... also it's more about edge alignment than force

yeah, if you're fucking fucking air

>Death Stranding and Cyberpunk
They aren't even out yet

war scythes are not agricultural scythes.The same way a modern kitchen knife is not a Kabar.

but my kitchen knife is a kabar

>str makes you hit hardr and carry more stuff
>dex makes you hit/reload/cast faster
>int makes you read faster and cast more powerfull spells
>speed makes you walk faster
also
>swords are all in one weapons but shit at "yo nigga i need some reach/armor shredding/stealth" situations
>there is no minmaxing of stats and no bloatshit items

Attached: c7c.jpg (968x700, 259K)

Where the fuck did these medieval youtubers even come out of? Now you can't go to any sword topic without one of their retarded fans parroting shit he heard from the video and acting like they are the authority.

99% correct except global warming is real

>mexicans
>supporting united kingdom and kuck klux klan
???

Both are scythes. War scythes are always made from agricultural ones. Nobody sane would make them from ground up.

they always existed, just like AVGN, social media make the community realize this wasn't as pathetic as it seem, and suddenly a lot of chads started to listen
like adulthood when the nerd becomes the boss of the chad

(You)

war scythes are just polearms
agricultural scythes are completely different and were not used in war

...

>boer concentration camps were refugee camps

Attached: 1482007364239.jpg (536x536, 47K)

a spade can be made into a spear but you dont call them warspades
War scythes are unusable as a scythe but usable as a polearm so they're a polearm not a scythe

>A war scythe or military scythe is a form of pole weapon with a curving single-edged blade with the cutting edge on the concave side of the blade. Its blade bears some superficial resemblance to that of an agricultural scythe from which it likely evolved, but the war scythe is otherwise unrelated to agricultural tools and is a purpose-built infantry melee weapon. The blade of a war scythe has regularly proportioned flats, a thickness comparable to that of a spear or sword blade, and slightly curves along its edge as it tapers to its point. This is very different from farming scythes, which have very thin and irregularly curved blades, specialised for mowing grass and wheat only, unsuitable as blades for improvised spears or polearms.

>>climate change isn't real
>This is also true

Attached: 46a.png (645x729, 97K)

The only games to properly do bows were Diablo II and Dungeon Siege, because they required both DEX and STR.
The DEX is necessary for aiming, but to actually be able to pull a heavier bow you need STR.
This is the only way it should ever be done.

If you actually watched Lindy's video on the subject, he explicitly mentioned that war scythes existed and were perfectly serviceable weapons, but he was specifically talking about agricultural scythes (the kind seen in artist's depictions of the Grim Reaper) and how they were not at all suited to combat

Bows require dexterity to aim properly you dumb fuck.
Dual wielding was a novelty, but it did exist.
Scythes can be magical weapons

Attached: 1556930043562.jpg (255x220, 7K)

MG42 is better than the bren though

>swordsmen and bowmen require similar attributes
depends on the setting and the in-universe rules

>Game has wall-mounted torches that dual-wield scythes as a dual class viking berzerker with classy as fuck back scythe scabbards engaged in a siege battle

Attached: 1555816763441.jpg (1280x720, 70K)

>game has France

War scythes are reforged agricultiral ones. What's difficult to understand? To to make it you need typical agricultural scythe and proper blacksmith equipment to convert headpiece into one.

A silencer makes a gun go from, well, a fucking gunshot, to a guy with a horrible cold coughing.
Not something you just don't notice, even several rooms away.

You forgot to mention back attacks

>they’re not villains

>dual-wielding is impractical and practically no one in the ancient world ever did it because the benefits it grants are negligible and it's far more preferable to use your off-hand to carry a shield or to wield a larger two-handed weapon
>btw look at these awesome Chinese daggers I can dual-wield with my sicknasty wing chun skillz lmao
Literally WHAT did he mean by this?

Attached: really supers my novas.gif (480x264, 1.54M)

That's int, not dex, m8

It's like reading a greentext that came straight out of borderlands

Attached: I feel my brain cells committing suicide.jpg (217x266, 26K)

y'all dumbasses arguing over str vs dex realize that building muscle is the best way to be more precise, right?
Str vs Dex isn't a real thing outside of video games where stats are arbitrary.

Spade is maybe 5 feet long. Spears are at least 6'6"

In your system, Bows would work off STR and FIN then.
Swords will work off AGI and FIN.

>Hand-eye coordination is for faggots and not required to hit a target, all u ou do is pull back aim at a 45 angle and let loose with hundreds of other arrows!

You can do this in Dragon's Dogma

>scythe-kun still wanders threads looking for scythes to defend
Feels like I haven't seen him in a while

Attached: 1235106855707.jpg (400x400, 66K)

I'm talking about irl man, both require strength precision and dexterity. the vast majority of swordsman would have been trained with a bow and bowmen with a sword too so it's unlikely that even a master swordsman would just be unable to use a bow or visa versa they just wouldn't be masters at both.

>no one used scythes
untrue

Attached: Chełmoński_Modlitwa_przed_bitwa.jpg (800x566, 142K)

>Dual wielding might be the gayest thing ever but it was unfortunately a real thing.
Not really, people did duel wield but not with two swords, it would be sword+dagger or
>sword+utility. I think there's one mention of dual wielding swords in a historical treatise
>Scythes are multipurpose tool-weapons.
No they aren't, they're gardening tools. War scythes existed but they look completely different to a normal scythe

Attached: iu[1].jpg (900x582, 94K)

>All these people arguing over weapons when it has been demonstrably proven that chemical weapons are so superior that everyone agreed they needed to be banned to maintain the meta of war

Attached: fartmunch.gif (217x198, 206K)

That's completely true but the argument is which of those arbitrary stats should be the one used to determine the damage dealt by a bow in any given game system.

Btw, the answer is that bows should require a certain amount of STR, with characters that don't meet that requirement suffering penalties to damage dealt and/or stamina costs (and possibly being completely unable to shoot it at all if their STR is too low), but beyond that their damage scales with DEX to represent accuracy and the likelihood of hitting a target's vital points. Higher poundage bows require more STR and deal more base damage as a result.

Using a bow in the military wasn't about finsing a target and aiming for it like you'd use it in hunting, it was about pulling the string back and firing in the air on command. That's all strength

DEX makes more sense for swords, Strength makes more sense for bows. All you'd have to do would be to swap the name of stats

To begin with the amount of dexterity needed for a bow is much much higher than the amount needed for a sword, secondly, any melee fighting requires stamina, as you have to actually get in the frontlines and if you are lucky to not die quickly, you better have energy to keep fighting. Firing bows requires a lot less energy.

uh... no, even if they did the volley thing, they still aimed... otherwise, every arrow would go to a completely different location, since these volleys traveled a long distance. They needed to fall upon the same group of opponents to be effective, or even useful

You do realize long bows easily weighed over 50 pounds, right?

but that's not true, in fact it's easier to kill someone with a sword than with a bow, with no training... bows need strength, but skill with the weapon is more important

>game portrays the fr*nch as the heroes

>easily weighed over 50 pounds
you mean they required draw force of 50 pounds?

>the amount of dexterity needed for a bow is much much higher than the amount needed for a sword
you don't know what it takes to fight an armed and armoured man with a sword then, it might be a different story with a mace ore polarm but even still your reflexes and accuracy need to be just as great if not better id even argue that a bow requires LESS dexterity

except they never fired in volleys you actual retard that wouldnt have done jack shit besides waste a bunch of arrows and at best spook the horses

>game has bows that require DEX instead of STR
This angers me to this day
DEX is hand articulation, it should make the firing of the arrow more proficient and optimised while the body strength is the requirement.

that's not how aiming works... nor understanding how the wind affects the shot
>DEX is hand articulation
uh... no

Nigga, to begin with, you don't know shit because we are talking about TWO kinds of different motor skills, both which can generally be categorized as "dexterity" but are VERY different. Firing a bow requires more dexterity because you use BOTH types of motor skills. Reflexes is agility, not dexterity, accuracy requirements are A LOT higher for bows. 0/10 weak bait.

Actually watch the video you spastic

lindy is such an insufferable little creature but he riles up jf something fierce

short weapons like fighting knives were used defensively when in the off hand
it follows perfectly well from his argument that youd have something defensive instead of another sword

if you're fighting in a melee with an enemy who is also fighting you and you're both in armour you need to be exceptionally accurate with your sword in order to get any worthwhile hits in unless you want to turn it into a grapple and assuming you both have your visors down that could quickly go very wrong for the both of you because expending yourself at such a rate with your oxygen restricted will make you lose focus entirely.

>if you're fighting in a melee with an enemy who is also fighting you and you're both in armour you need to be exceptionally accurate with your sword
Several levels bellow being able to hit the mark of a moving object several meters away. And again, you're talking about one of the two motor skills that are required for using a bow.

Knights were the most ripped soldiers on the battlefield because they were trained from youth and came from wealthy enough families to be eating plenty of protein every day

>Knights fought on battlefields

Attached: 0956abeb54bd3a92752618c07c4f2bf5.jpg (490x319, 37K)

bows don't require nearly as good agility or dexterity you only have to be slightly quicker with your hands than the average person since knocking an arrow is just muscle memory. you also don't need to be much faster than the average person since you're not going to get chased down. the most necessary things for an archer in terms of attributes are accuracy and strength but even still a swordsman and a bowman wouldnt be worlds apart in accuracy you fucking sperg.

They did

>DEX is required for aiming
is not really applicable to bows. At least in the sense DEX is used in games.
Aiming with a bow basically requires posture, stability, and practical knowledge. Meanwhile, DEX as a "stat" means overarching coordination, nimbleness, swiftness, agility - all and all, ability to do complex actions with your body.
Basically, if your DEX isn't tremendously low so it negatively affects your day-to-day body coordination (as in, you can't walk properly, your hands are constantly shaking, etc) it has barely any effect on using a bow, as fundamentals of using a bow are rather straightforward and have no "complex movements" involved to make use of your bow.
What people argue about being "dextrous with a bow" is what a game would categorize as a "weapon skill". Which is indeed vital and absolutely required but has almost nothing to do with a character "stat" that is supposed to affect everything else. DEX is a stat that positively affects skills like stealing, lockpicking, and moving silently - nothing of which have anything in common with using bows.
On the other hand, swords barely require any strength to use. The fundamentals of using a sword are all about edge-alignment, cutting/thrusting form, and fencing. Even on the most basic level, swords benefit tremendously from the wielder having a precise body control and an ability to perform complex moves easily.
That's the reasoning behind bows being STR weapons and swords - DEX ones.
That being said, if the game does have a dedicated "aiming" stat - like Perception in Fallout - it's absolutely vital for bows as people do indeed have different aptitudes for judging the distance, geometrical thinking, etc. which can be easily attributed to a "stat". So, if in-universe definition of DEX does include said aptitudes, it is useful for bows, however not as a "prerequisite" - which is stil STR - but rather the stat they would scale with.

>is not really applicable to bows
yeah, I don't feel like reading the rest of that retarded testament
where did this meme of aiming being about muscle memory come from? do you even know what wind is?

>bows don't require nearly as good agility or dexterity
You aren't even trying anymore you fucking brainlet. To begin with because you're not even talking about dexterity anymore, secondly because you literally just repeated what you already said.
>since knocking an arrow is just muscle memory
It's not, on the fucking field you have to calculate the wing velocity, target trajectory, target distance, that ON TOP of having to keep your hands still against your heartbeat.
>accuracy
That comes from dexterity, that's a multifaceted ability that's entirely derivative from the two types of motor skills.
>but even still a swordsman and a bowman wouldnt be worlds apart in accuracy you fucking sperg.
Making a claim doesn't make said claim true you fucking pea brain mongrel.

>do you even know what wind is?
What does wind have to do with dexterity?
Who did say anything about "muscle memory"?
Could you make a less retarded statement next time, please.

>What does wind have to do with dexterity?
see, the fact that you don't comprehend this shows how off the loop you are
Knowing where his arrow will land is pretty much an obvious requirement for an archer- Since the wind affects completely the trajectory of the projectile, knowing how to counter that disadvantage is crucial. Understanding the effect of wind, and being able to predict how your target will move is part of learning how to shoot a damn arrow. Or anything, really.
And no, dexterity is not agility, which is mostly what you're describing.

>you're not even talking about dexterity anymore
look up the definition of dexterity
>It's not, on the fucking field you have to calculate the wing velocity, target trajectory, target distance, that ON TOP of having to keep your hands still against your heartbeat.
nocking you mong NOCKING all of what you just said has more to do with wit than anything else we've even talked about wich a swordsman should have plenty of anyway
>accuracy comes from dexterity
no it doesn't accuracy is accuracy dexterity has more to do with accuracy of smaller coordinated movements it has nothing to do with aiming, if your aim is off your target your accuracy was wrong or you didn't calculate shit right if you lack dexterity you'll fumble and other clumsy shit.

The thing is that he is right to a point. Cavalry is fucking stupid. But it was effective stupid IF and only IF used in the correct and very narrow manner. That's why history is peppered with cavalry charges that ended in total fucking disaster and nobles getting dehorsed and shanked. Hell just look at France during the protestant wars. Noble after noble took a paltry amount of cavalry and rushed massed infantry only to get wiped out.

If nobles did not need to be pompous as fuck and need to stand the fuck out and/or be kept from the real fighting horses would have been regulated to transport and scouting.

>they required both DEX and STR
wizardry

>game is good if it requires skill
literally retarded

I did, agility IS NOT dexterity.
>nocking you mong NOCKING
Not my fault you mistyped and I got the meaning differently from what you expected. On nocking I do agree, but it does not invalidate anything else I said.
>has more to do with wit than anything else we've even talked about wich a swordsman should have plenty of anyway
Except not, when you have to fire at several different types of target, muscle memory doesn't even come into question precisely because of the variation involved.
>it has nothing to do with aiming
>dexterity has more to do with accuracy of smaller coordinated movements
Congratulations, you just contradicted yourself. Retard.

1. People would call them that.
2. Name one game that is attempting to be even remotely historically accurate that has berzerkers.
3. While it would make sense to have a minimum strength requirement for bows, that makes it harder to balance the games stats, and adds a whole lot of complication to your stat system for no particular reason.
4. Horses.
5. Scythes could certainly be used as weapons, and they are rarely depicted in a non heavy fantasy setting as a weapon of choice.
6. Just because it is not a good thing, does not make it a thing that would happen sometimes.
7. Because people like being able to see in video games, go figure.
8. This was also a thing.

Attached: 66a4f78166ebd51af158347460501a9a_3x3.jpg (916x515, 40K)

>see, the fact that you don't comprehend this shows how off the loop you are
It shows that you're retarded, user.
What you're describing is "practical knowledge" which I had addressed.
You are also talking about Dexterity in a sense of being "dextrous with a bow" which I had also addressed.
Dexterity as a stat has literally nothing to do with judging the wind.
And yes, in games Dexterity and Agility and mostly synonyms and are interchangeable - very few systems distinguish them as separate stats.
Now, please do think before posting next time.

Fate GO was such a fucking let down. From moment 1 I could see that they were going to be stingy and penny pinching as fuck because "Muh IP." I can generally enjoy gacha shit for a little while but I ditched Fate GO fast as fuck.

Imagine being forced to carry that shit around and use it. No wonder they invented guns.

I'm surprised he hasn't claimed Joan of Arc was just a cheerleader

If retards in this thread realized how difficult it is to shoot a moving target at more than 10 meters, even on optimal conditions, they wouldn't be claiming that bows are more about str than dex.

One of France's most famed military figures being a schizo woman is pure comedy, why would he want to detract from that?

>practical knowledge
What the fuck, that's exactly what dexterity is... being good at a skill, it could be an activity or a weapon. Dexterity as a stat means that the characters is adept at learning skills that require more coordination and precise movements and concentration. This is exactly what a bow requires. Aiming comes from learning how to use the thing properly, thus getting more dexterous at it.

And I don't give a fuck about what games think of the exchange between AGI/DEX, they're mostly wrong. They're not synonyms and should never be. You can be very agile without being dexterous, and the other way around. Agility has more to do with speed of movements, not precision, and stamina.

>On nocking I do agree
>muscle memory doesn't even come into question
that's the only point I said muscle memory all other points of knowing how to draw your bow for each target comes down to your wits
>you just contradicted yourself. Retard.
listen here you baiting shit; if you aim a gun at a taget and make a perfect shot 9 times out of 10 that means you're accurate but if you go to reload and fumble then and drop your mag that means you're not dexterous their accuracies on a completely different scale dexterity being your aptitude for much more sophisticated rapid movement but accuracy as an attribute would be your ability to aim consciously at a specific target and hit it reliably.

>dexterity being your aptitude for much more sophisticated rapid movement
that's your idea of dexterity... no the actual meaning of the word, but whatever makes you happy
I can't believe someone is really claiming that being dexterous with a bow is about reloading fast, and has nothing to do with the actual main function of the weapon

>muscle memory doesn't even come into question
On SHOOTING an arrow, are you retarded or just pretending?
>all other points of knowing how to draw your bow for each target comes down to your wits
Fuck no, anyone that has ever shoot anything will tell you the same thing, the largest difficulty is on being able to properly position your body, that's both fine motor skills and gross motor skills, the complication isn't calculating how you should do it, which is a mental task rather than a physical one, yet another skill that's completely unrelated to swords, but managing to actually do the movements you need with your body in accordance to your calculations. Swordfighting requires a lot of strategy, yes, but the mental calculations for trajectory and positioning are on a whole different field in comparison to bows, not even necessarily harder or easier overall.
>but accuracy as an attribute would be your ability to aim consciously at a specific target and hit it reliably.
Which REQUIRES fine motor skills, you goddamn fucking retard.

And this is also a point I address. See, you would've looked way less retarded were you to actually read the post.

that's exactly what it means yes and you're silly enough to not even look it up or your reading comprehension is just too poor to read basic definitions
>>muscle memory doesn't even come into question
I was literally quoting the retard who said that retard.
>fuck no, bows have nothing to do with wits
>the mental calculations for trajectory and positioning are on a whole different field in comparison to bows
get a load of this guy
>Swordfighting requires a lot of strategy
yes and it also requires a lot of fine and gross motor skills just like using a bow as you've said in the case of a bow you can't act on whats in your mind if you're not physically adept enough for it
>Which REQUIRES fine motor skills, you goddamn fucking retard.
in the case of a bow the actions leading up to that point require both gross and fine motor skills yes but mind you I never once said bowmen don't require fine motor skills.

how long does it take for an incel like you to understand the actual meaning of DEX?
being able to shoot a target with a bow is dexterity, don't know why it is so hard to understand... dexterity = skill

Attached: dexterity.png (936x336, 21K)

Its clickbait, he talks about how ancient people would've seen it as stupid. Since back then horses were small and stirrups weren't invented yet

>I was literally quoting the retard who said that retard.
I LITERALLY JUST SAID THAT WAS REFERRING TO SHOOTING AND NOT NOCKING, because YOU mistyped "nocking" as "knocking". Jesus Fucking Christ.
>get a load of this guy
Not an argument brainlet.
>yes and it also requires a lot of fine and gross motor skills
Yeah no, you fucking massive demented mongrel. It requires GROSS motor skills, fine motor skills don't even come into the equation when it comes to swordfighting. You're just outing yourself as a massive ignorant retard stuck on mount stupid at this point.
>in the case of a bow the actions leading up to that point require both gross and fine motor skills yes but mind you I never once said bowmen don't require fine motor skills
No, you said that swordfighting and bow shooting require similar skills, when that's ABSOLUTELY not the case.

skill =/= knowledge or theory it has to do with practice or even innate talent. to perform something with great skill does not necessarily mean you must also posses great knowledge of what's being done. in the example granted "He caught the ball with great dexterity." you wouldn't assume he has great knowledge on the fundements of ball catching unless it states that this was his profession.

You fucking said they were reforged into primitive SPEARS and then said they weren't spears. You're a fucking moron.

>I LITERALLY JUST SAID THAT WAS REFERRING TO SHOOTING AND NOT NOCKING, because YOU mistyped "nocking" as "knocking".
wasn't sure you were even the same guy since what your saying seems so silly but honestly how could you even come to that it's pretty clear what was meant, there is no meaning behind the word "knocking" in archery so the only thing I could have meant was nocking.
>Not an argument brainlet.
also not an argument
you made a very obvious contradiction, your wit very clearly has to do "the mental calculations for trajectory and positioning" and yet you said bows have nothing to do with wits that seems pretty worthy of a "get a load of this guy" because what you said was so retarded.
>Yeah no, you fucking massive demented mongrel. It requires GROSS motor skills, fine motor skills don't even come into the equation
I was stating that BOWS have to do with both of these things but so do swords obviously, any archer could tell you bows require this as could any hema practitioner tell you swords require this. you must think that sword play only has to do large dumb swings and bashing eachother about to deny its dexterity.
>No, you said that swordfighting and bow shooting require similar skills
No, I said they require similar attributes but differing skills in almost those exact words so I was either right that your reading comprehension is for shit or your memory is hazy from all that anger.

That's irrelevant... if the point of a bow is to hit a target far away, and you're good at hitting targets far away, then you're skillful and dexterous with the bow. Who talked anything about the theory behind it? way to try to find a scapegoat

>wasn't sure you were even the same guy since what your saying seems so silly but honestly how could you even come to that it's pretty clear what was meant
No? Knocking an arrow could literally mean "shooting an arrow" said in an awkward way.
>you made a very obvious contradiction, your wit very clearly has to do "the mental calculations for trajectory and positioning" and yet you said bows have nothing to do with wits
Not with the "wit" that you use for swordfighting, stop using generic terms as blankets for wildly different types of skill, it's disingenuous and intellectually disgusting.
>I was stating that BOWS have to do with both of these things but so do swords obviously
Yeah no, swords do NOT use fine motor skills because your movements have to be rapid and use a lot of musculature, you clearly don't have any clue about what "fine motor skills" means.
>I said they require similar attributes
And that's wrong because the type of motor skills required is different, which translates to different attributes to any developer worth his salt.

>The definition of dexterity is irrelevant in an argument about the definition of dexterity
COOL
also skill =/= dexterity, you're synonymizing words just because their in the description of the definition, if you were to hire a man to build a house and the workers were in no particular rush to get it done but it was still done well and skillfully you wouldn't describe that as dexterous just because it was skillful so it should be fairly obvious that they are not synonyms.

>knocking could mean shooting
Shut up.

They did you inbred nigger. Later many of them opted to hire mercenaries so they could focus on gay shit like politics and managing their respective villages, but every knight was required to spend fourty days in a year in service to their Lord/King doing shit like campaigning and punching knaves. One of the most effective battle tactics at the time was to just line up a bunch of mounted knights armed with lances and have them charge pretty much shoulder to shoulder with each other until they rammed into the enemy, and when you're looking at heavily armored mounted units trained in the use of a lance, you're looking at a knight.

Not an argument. Do you realize how ridiculous it is to hold that against me when you were the one who typed the word wrongly?

Not in games, you moron. In games what you refer to as "dexterity" is almost universally represented as "weapon skill".
Even in the games that have DEX and AGI as separate attributes, DEX is never used as something that "helps train". "Stats" in games readily and constantly affect characters. Dexterity your retarded ass is talking about has no place as a character's "Stat".
Essentially, you're arguing semantics and are very bad at it.

By the way, by the fucking definition you're quoting, Archery requires no "dexterity" as it isn't a "difficult action". And "judging the wind" isn't "performed with hands".

Please, please stop being so retarded.

all those replies and not one valid counter
argument. good job

>No? Knocking an arrow could literally mean "shooting an arrow" said in an awkward way.
except no one ever has said that in all of history and if your friend told you that he thinks you're gullible
>stop using generic terms as blankets for wildly different types of skill
we're using these generic terms because this is a descussion oriented around games, games that use attributs like WIT SPD STR DEX ect so I'm keeping it in relativity to that
>Yeah no, swords do NOT use fine motor skills
>you don't know what fine motor skills are!
"Fine motor skill is the coordination of small muscles, in movements—usually involving the synchronization of hands and finger"
a lot of sword play and in fact the vast majority of martial arts have much to do with coordination in both large and small muscle groups especially when fighting an opponent every single movement in your entire body matters
>believing that's me
do you really think my only argument would be "shut up"

>Slow attack deals alot of damage
>Fast attacks deal less damage

Attached: Why.jpg (593x825, 269K)

>plate armor used with a giant shield

Attached: 1510434546392.jpg (430x650, 29K)

You didn't disprove user, you reinforced his point. You were combative for no reason.

Decently animated games have "slow attacks" do have a long wind-up part and a fast swing part, so it generally makes sense.

>except no one ever has said that in all of history and if your friend told you that he thinks you're gullible
Not a fucking argument. And for all I know that could be you samefagging.
>we're using these generic terms because this is a descussion oriented around games, games that use attributs like WIT SPD STR DEX ect
Then to begin with WIT, doesn't exist in games, ever, I challenge you to show me a game, not a roguelike, that uses it. Secondly dexterity on games only revolves around fine motor skills, for one very important reason, balance.
>a lot of sword play and in fact the vast majority of martial arts have much to do with coordination in both large and small muscle groups especially when fighting an opponent every single movement in your entire body matters
Except that fine motor skills specifically describe DELICATE and PRECISE movements done by those small muscles. When you are thrusting with your sword that doesn't happen, when you are playing sports like basketball that doesn't happen, when you are using a bow THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT SKILL.

>The definition of dexterity
The post I was quoting didn't even talk about the definition of dexterity... it was about "theory = skill", which was completely out of place, and seems like a desperate attempt of someone who has run out of ideas

Games take different approaches to the damn stat, you dumbass, it's not even "universally represented" as anything, in some games DEX = +ranged dmg, in some others DEX = defense, so what the fuck is your point?
Bows = dexterity over any other stat.

all of those things actually happened, apart from bows requiring DEX instead of STR

>Games take different approaches to the damn stat
Which is a point I had already addressed, you absolute retard.
>Bows = dexterity over any other stat.
Except it makes no sense. Doubly so as a prerequisite.

That's just a funny looking polearm.
You either use the cool scythe or don't include them at all.

>That's just a funny looking polearm.
that's what a scythe is

>Which is a point I had already addressed
you keep repeating that shit, and what goes over your head is that even though, yes, you wrote things about that, there is a slightly huge probability of you being wrong. I'll give you a clue, it's a percentage bigger than 99.99...9% and lower than 100.00...1%

Except you're retarded and have no idea what you're talking about.
What I wrote is objectively correct - if you think any of your statements "counter" that or even "contradicts" it - you're doubly retarded.
Holy shit, how do you even breathe?

>Not a fucking argument.
except it is, if you right now go to a search engine and look up "bow knocking -nocking" or "archery knocking -nocking" there will be no results beyond the occasional misspelling of "nocking" but id rather trust my own anecdotal evidence over yours when it comes to archery terminology
>wit doesn't exist in games
divinity original, sin I just assumed it was more common, thats my mistake, but I think it would have to play under int then (not a big stretch right?). I also disagree with the assertion that DEX revolves around motor skills in games although I still beleive it does in real life, in games it only seems to boost stats on weapons the devs think are dainty
>When you are thrusting with your sword that doesn't happen
your opponent doesn't stay still for you and just wait to get stabbed it's a given that even when you're attacking you have to be ready to adjust at all times be it a movement that only activates smaller muscle groups and tendons or larger ones in any varying degree of accuracy.
>specifically describe DELICATE and PRECISE
delicate in relativity to gross motor skils but that's only because of the difference in size and power between the muscles they aren't necessarily delicate within the relative groups though though they can be.
>when you are playing sports like basketball that doesn't happen
sure maybe on the level that someone like you or I would play at but it would be an entirely different story if you were trained as a warrior of basketball whos going into a life or death situation in each game. I know its a silly image but I'm sure you get it.

just because you think it's "objectively correct", it doesn't make it right... in fact that's the opposite of "objectively correct"... I'd say good try, but it really sucked

>he thinks bows are hard to draw
That is a yikes from me.

You are more than welcome to try and debunk it which is something you so far had utterly failed to accomplish.
And no, arguing semantics - especially in cases when your argument was already long addressed - isn't it.

>That kid who spun his arm around several times before punching someone

you were making the assertion that dexterity = skill and skill = knowledge and knowledge in this case would have to do with your grasp of the fundamentals of catching a ball, this is known as theory. if you have an innate talent for something but lack knowledge you can't describe the theory of how do it to others, like lifting your arm it has nothing to do with your knowledge of it. so dexterity is not theory.

>you were making the assertion that dexterity = knowledge
where did I do that?

youtu.be/ixNviTpu1iQ

>except it is
You make a typo, I interpret the sentence wrong because of that, somehow that's my fault and not yours, and somehow you persisting on that point is an "argument"? Are you trolling? At this point this is getting so retarded I can't even tell.
>but id rather trust my own anecdotal evidence over yours when it comes to archery terminology
Of course you would, because that's the precise type of reaction that one should expect from the autistic retard that doesn't understand stat balancing, the terms he uses or the very subject being discussed, the type of autist that would spend hours discussing irrelevant semantics.
>not a big stretch right?
Yes, it's a massive fucking stretch because if developers followed your idea, the optimal build for EVERY class would be exactly the same with makes, rogues, swordsmen and archers all putting the same amount of stats on every single stat because "mental calculations are wit and every class needs that, and dexterity are both fine and gross motor skills and every class needs at least one of those, and luck is important so every class needs that and strength is important because otherwise you can't carry your equipment so every class needs that". You are RETARDED, MENTALLY CHALLENGED. You don't understand that the sharp movements that one does with swords are gross motor skills, which aren't covered by dexterity, you do not understand that if stats were to be followed to a T it would kill build variety. You don't understand anything about either devving or the practical implications of the skills related to the subject at hand.

>you have to be ready to adjust at all times be it a movement that only activates smaller muscle groups and tendons or larger ones in any varying degree of accuracy.
YOU RETARDED NIGGER. WALKING, requires both gross and fine motor skills, and yet no game requires that, you know why? Because the AMOUNT you need is so ridiculously small that it's taken for granted. Same for swordfighting and finer motor skills.
>delicate in relativity to gross motor skils but that's only because of the difference in size and power
You are LITERALLY CHANGING THE DEFINITION OF THE WORD BY ADDING A "RELATIVE" TO IT. How fucking DISINGENOUS can you get? The entire REASON why they are called fine motor skills is because they are delicate.
>sure maybe on the level that someone like you or I would play at but it would be an entirely different story if you were trained as a warrior of basketball whos going into a life or death situation in each game
NO YOU FUCKING DISINGENOUS FAGGOT, just because you need gross motor skills to move your arms when typing it doesn't mean that's even worth mentioning.

>>practical knowledge
>What the fuck, that's exactly what dexterity is...

>don't know why it is so hard to understand... dexterity = skill

He also didn't know straight-snathed scythes exist, he assumed all scythes in the world are those big heavy Anglo things with the bendy snaths that can't be turned into polearms.

Reforged is the wrong word. They just bent the socket on the blade straight so it could be thrust more easily.

>t. shot a 15 pound bow once

Are you retarded? "practical knowledge" is skill... which is the same as dexterity in this context. Never talked about "theoretical knowledge" which would be, in the case of the ball, knowing why the ball travels in that direction with such acceleration.
Why are you so desperate to make this a semantic issue, when you don't even know how to use the words you type?

theoretical knowledge =/= practical knowledge = skill = dexterity

want to discuss about how "finesse" isn't required when used a bow?

>DUR THE POPE IS THE BEST
>HUSSITES ARE THE WORST, AFTER THE NORMANS LETS ATTACK BOHEMIA!
Fucking dumb bitch

>You make a typo, I interpret the sentence wrong because of that, somehow that's my fault and not yours
it shows that your out of your depth when it comes to archery you've likely never even picked up a bow because there is no term called knocking there and there has never been a perseon to have called loosing an arrow knocking and I just proved it but somehow its my fault that you don't know terminology or you have poor reading comprehension and no contextual awareness. So yes, of course I'd trust myself over someone who has no clue about these things.
>Yes, it's a massive fucking stretch
then why not just accept wit as an idea? Thats what were doing here by challenging the idea of putting bows under dex only.
>the optimal build for EVERY class would be exactly the same
but that's just simply wrong, not only are then making the assertion that a build has nothing to do with skills which are separate from attributes but you're also forgetting how people min/max, frankly I think it wouldn't change much since you'd still be either prioritizing either for consistency or power. and again even if you had a character with 10 int but you had no magic skills you wouldn't then be able to cast magic for no reason but youd have mor aptidude and even then thats forgetting that most rpgs lock in character classes so you wouldnt worry about the game breaking from a bunch of magic casting archer paladins. I just don't think you have a firm grasp on how builds work at all.

I'm not at all changing around definitions they are delicate because the muscles themselves are small but again in releativity to the muscles themselves the movements are still just as dramatic as any larger muscles for fine or gross they all are made of the same shit they all fire the exact same but the resulting force is what differentiates them. can you read?

but knowledge =/= skill, as I've said knowledge can go into skill but they are not synonymous. and dexterity can be used skillfuly but dexterity =/= skill, the two are again no synonyms.

Rape? Does it have rape, Sansa? The rape?

solid bait. I would have thought you'd be more (you)s. I'm adding mine own to your meager collection. I sincerely hope you nab a few more.

You mentioned "practical knowledge" which in fact is skill.
And as, I claimed before, dexterity and skill are the same.
I've already posted this.
They're literally synonymous.

Boy wait until you hear about javelins and estocs

practical knowledge has to do with skill but it does not mean skill it is not skill but it directly contributes to skill.
Just because an online dictionary says that its synonymous does not make the words equivalent and this can easily be proven.
I don't know the exact dictionary you're using but as it states: "the ability to perform a difficult action quickly and skillfully with the hands" this is likely in direct conflict with that very same dictionaries definition of skill as I can reasonably assume it leaves out "quickly" and "with the hands" meaning the two words are not equivalent to one another so skill =/= dexterity, they are not synonymous and you should avoid using them interchangeably.

Attached: possible suspect found in notre dame surveillance footage.jpg (480x360, 9K)

Fo you have brain damage or is this exquisite bait?

Ok, so it's you against several dictionaries, including Cambridge and Oxford. Who am I gonna listen to? I'm sick of this discussion, it's like talking to a wall, a retarded wall, even if logic tells you walls can't be retarded, you're the living proof that they are very real.

you sound retarded m8

You're wrong and an archer disagrees with you

So what have we agreed on? Should bows be based on DEX or STR?

based

Absolutley retarded
Its more like

Bow
STR ++
DEX +

Sword
STR +
DEX ++
AGI +

Spear
STR +
DEX +

Spears were used heaps for a reason, its an effective weapon that even a brainlet can use

>it shows that your out of your depth
Or that I legitimately misinterpreted what you said, or that English isn't my first language, you're focusin on ONE possible scenario because it's the one where you don't have to put any logical thought behind your posts because you aren't capable of such a thing.
>because there is no term called knocking
People are inventing new ways to use old words all the time nowadays, knocking literally means "collide with (someone or something), giving them a hard blow" it fits perfectly with the act of shooting an arrow, how the fuck was I supposed to know? Also for every point you try to make about this, I'll remind you that you're only doing it because you cannot argue about the subject itself. Keep focusing on semantics faggot.
>but somehow its my fault that you don't know terminology
It's your fault that you mistyped something, yes, you fucking faggot.
>someone who has no clue about these things
Says the faggot with no clues on how arguments work, or language for that matter.
>then why not just accept wit as an idea?
Because it's a retarded generic term that might mean 300 different things. The fact that there was a misunderstanding and you are specifically proposing the idea of using a generic term which increases the likelihood of such thing happening again and again, shows you are incapable of learning.
>but that's just simply wrong, not only are then making the assertion that a build has nothing to do with skills which are separate from attributes
EVERY SINGLE CLASS WOULD HAVE A MINIMUM REQUIRED AMOUNT TO WALK, A MINIMUM AMOUNT TO CARRY EQUIPMENT, A MINIMUM AMOUNT TO EVEN HOLD A FUCKING OBJECT. Yes you are proposing killing the attribute system altogether by making the skill system the only relevant one.

Both but STR is obviously much more important when talking about heavy poundage war bows
skill doesnt mean shit if you arent strong enough to use it, and skill is something you develop by using it

>I just don't think you have a firm grasp on how builds work at all.
You are LITERALLY advocating for making an attribute system where every class would have similar requirements, at this point, might as well remove the entire fucking system from the game.
>I'm not at all changing around definitions they are delicate because the muscles themselves are small but again in releativity to the muscles themselves the movements are still just as dramatic
No they aren't, fine motor skills can actually be used with large muscle groups. You're using your own fucking headcanon for the definition of the term, the very fucking picture you posted explicitly says that fine motor skills aren't made solely with small muscles.
>"Motor skills are movements and actions of the muscles. Typically, they are categorized into two groups: gross motor skills and fine motor skills. Gross motor skills are involved in movement and coordination of the arms, legs, and other large body parts and movements. Gross motor skills can be further divided into two subgroups of locomotor skills and object control skills. Gross locomotor skills would include running, jumping, sliding, and swimming. Object control skills would include throwing, catching and kicking. Fine motor skills are involved in smaller movements that occur in the wrists, hands, fingers, and the feet and toes. They participate in smaller actions such as picking up objects between the thumb and finger, writing carefully, and even blinking. These two motor skills work together to provide coordination. Less developed kids focus on their gross movements, while more developed kids have more control over their fine movements."

So you want the guy with the bow to shoot one arrow every 50 minutes.

What?

No they didn't, retard. How can some piece of wood weigh 50 pounds, dumbass?

There's literally zero agi on your bow build, that means he'll have no attack speed whatsoever.

That's a retarded statement. Not only your "rate of fire" with a bow ultimately decided by your draw strength, archers rarely were "shooting as frequently as they can".

I did a bad job of explaining this so I'll try to rephrase.

"all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are square"

It's true that dexterity is skillful but skill is not dexterity so they cannot be equivalent

Practical knowledge can go into skill and skill can go into developing practical knowledge but skill and practical knowledge are not equivalent.

There is nothing wrong with disputing dictionaries as our language is not a dead one definitions are still shaky, you can prove this by going to mutliple dictionaries and seeing their contradictions between definitions. dictionaries were written by humans like you or I, sure they're people with degrees in such things but with proper argumentation a dictionary definition can be changed as they're not monolithic.

>Not only your "rate of fire" with a bow ultimately decided by your draw strength
Picking up an arrow, putting it on the right position, aiming towards the right direction, all of that comes from agility. Yours is a retarded post from someone who doesn't play video games.

the French were always based and have literally never done anything wrong, except maybe haiti but who cares about that shithole

lol i never noticed that he threw the blunt to the guy in the wheelchair.

in the case of a bow that comes from dexterity, not agility

Speed of movement is agility, dexterity would be the precision of said movement.

like most anglo cuckolds, he is an outspoken feminist and would never detract from a historical woman's cause even if she was superior French stock.

>game has bows that require DEX instead of STR
I honestly never understood that.

the point is that they all count to 5...
and no, swords don't require the same amount of strength than agility
bows require more dexterity than strength and not really need you to be agile
and spears require tons of agility, never been in a spear fight?

That would matter if the archer was a machine-gun and reloading was the main bottleneck.
However, by far the biggest bottleneck is the ability to repeatedly and quickly draw the bow, hence the strength impact. Rate of fire on a battlefield has almost no importance as the main objective of an archer squad is to simultaneously shoot on command to cover an area.
Agility would only have a noticeable effect if we're talking about trick-shooting with ultra-light bows, but that's for entertainment - not for combat.
Aiming has literally nothing to do with agility.

exactly... and you need precise movements and skill when drawing and aiming a bow

And speed of movement to do so in a timely fashion.

Even shakespeare wrote about the volleys of arrows sprinkling like rain... I find it funny how proud and arrogant you are of your ignorance.

>Rate of fire on a battlefield
Nigga, you are on a video game board on a video game thread, this isn't about a realistic scenario it's about conciliating realism with vidya, you don't face realistic scenarios in vidya for most part and when there are 40 kobolds running at your direction you don't want to shoot one arrow per minute.

Not him, but volleys were the most used way to shoot arrows in warfare.

In a real medieval battle arrows were only used at the start of the battle. They shot one or two volleys and then stopped or else they would hit their own comrades.

>or that English isn't my first language
Now you're blaming me for not knowing you're an esl? It could have easily been construed as an ad hominem like "oh you must be a foreigner because my words are just falling on deaf ears"
and you do nothing but shower me with insults yourself once you come out with an asspull like that what should even be said to that? can I really believe you weren't just backed into a corner and simply couldn't admit you don't practice archery?
>Says the faggot with no clues on how arguments work, or language for that matter.
Says the man who does nothing but throw insults to the wind and didn't know knocking from nocking? I'm interested to know what your own definition of an argument is, because to me it's an exchange of conflicting information to find out what information is right.
>EVERY SINGLE CLASS WOULD HAVE A MINIMUM REQUIRED AMOUNT TO WALK
No, that's silly there would be no reason for that and we could just assume that 0 well enough below average like how most games do it but not vegetative obviously. all I'm saying is isn't it strange how you can pick an archer but you still have the option to spec into int despite having 0 use for it at all? doesn't that sort of result in people with unbalanced builds?

well when I play tabletops there aren't hard requirements to gear but if you use gear you don't know how to use or have no natural talent for, you're more prone to a spectacular failure. I don't see why this couldn't happen in games directly inspired from tabletops.
>Gross motor skills are involved in movement and coordination of the arms, legs, and other large body parts and movements.
>Fine motor skills are involved in smaller movements that occur in the wrists, hands, fingers, and the feet and toes.
can you point to where it says that fine motor skills can also occur in large muscle groups?

And you are being retarded. You won't be able to kill the "kobolds" with a trick bow. You'll need a proper bow, a hunting one at very least. By that point, the main factor of you shooting quickly would be the speed with which you can draw the bow. Which is strictly strength. Endurance if you have to do that repeatedly. Only when you have both of these in abundance, will agility start to matter.

Are you incapable of comprehending a system any more complex than one of a shitty ARPG?

no but you can suck off your army for extra morale with the right mods

but that's only if you want to shoot extremely fast for some reason... and even then, dexterity witht he bow is still the main feat you need, and even strength becomes an issue

>Now you're blaming me for not knowing you're an esl?
Blaming you for the fact that you are wasting my time by repeatedly attempting to argue about inane shit in semantics. Again, if you had ANYTHING worthwhile to say, you'd be arguing with logic and backing instead of literally talking about a mistake YOU made several posts ago which was ALREADY corrected.
>Says the man who does nothing but throw insults to the wind and didn't know knocking from nocking?
You're the one who wrote it wrong, don't blame me. And yes language evolves, people use words in unconventional ways all the time, and I WASN'T going to blame you if that were the case, for someone so obsessed over semantics you know surprisingly very little about language.
>No, that's silly
Just as silly as saying that a swordsman would require dexterity because he needs a minimum fine motor skill of being able to move his fingers and grab the sword to use it.
>all I'm saying is isn't it strange how you can pick an archer but you still have the option to spec into int despite having 0 use for it at all?
Not at all, to begin with I barely know any game that does that, secondly it's the problem of badly designed games that make some attributes a "catch all" for several skills, sure archers can use a good dose of intelligence, but literally any fucking class can.

Literally the whole point of this discussion is whether or not archers and swordsmen need similar attributes, and the answer is no because dexterity only covers fine motor skills like crafting, keeping a steady aim and making delicate precise movements.

>well when I play tabletops there aren't hard requirements to gear but if you use gear you don't know how to use or have no natural talent for, you're more prone to a spectacular failure. I don't see why this couldn't happen in games directly inspired from tabletops.
Because you cannot make a game that follows the definite meaning of an attribute down to the T
>can you point to where it says that fine motor skills can also occur in large muscle groups?
>Fine motor skills are involved in smaller movements that occur in the wrists, hands, , and the feet.

No one with sense fought with bows. Bows were primarily for hunting or using for volleys in warfare. Even the sling was more effective in a brawl.

>but that's only if you want to shoot extremely fast for some reason
Which is precisely the type of situation that would occur on a video game.
>and even then, dexterity witht he bow is still the main feat you need, and even strength becomes an issue
And if regardless of the size your character is already able to reach the maximum precision, what do you do? Face it, being able to draw fast doesn't mean anything if you don't have fast hands.

> being able to draw fast doesn't mean anything if you don't have fast hands
uh... so what are you saying? it really sounds like "having fast hands" is more of a dexterity thing than agility... agility means you would probably take the arrow out of the quiver faster (like it was a big deal), but it says nothing about how would you aim properly

>it really sounds like "having fast hands" is more of a dexterity thing than agility
Having fast hands means reaching the place where the arrow is so you can pick it up and move it to the bow, dexterity means picking it up well, and positioning it well with steady hands. Again vidya is precisely the scenario where this is important.

>and no, swords don't require the same amount of strength than agility
Swords require barely any of either
>bows require more dexterity than strength and not really need you to be agile
How? A war bow requires lots of strength, far more than using a sword or spear, and the level of skill of an archer is much lower than a professional swordsman
>and spears require tons of agility, never been in a spear fight?
No we dont usually have spear fights in the 21st century you autist
Historically speaking, all a spearman does is stands there and pokes, hardly "agile"

The issue with Lindy is that the fag doesn't do enough research, he only look up a few sources that correlate with each others and take them as the holy truth, and he will not budge from it out of petty pride like he did with the Churchill and the spandau fiasco, and people fanboying him and spreading his stupid claims as the word of God.
Some things he claim IS true, such as dual welding not being a thing outside of extremely rare exceptions such as rapier and dagger, or that technique develloped by that one Japanese spaze Musasomething.
He's still a massive biased faggot and a larper at that though.

Attached: 1556395708698.jpg (540x537, 58K)

The Mexican government has cracked down on Catholics a few times. One of the older(and borderline forgotten) tenants of the klan was it's opposition to Catholicism.

context, dude
>Swords require barely any of either
You need to be agile with swords, no matter the scenario, whether it's armored combat, or a casual duel, you need to be able to dodge and attack weak spots rapidly
>How? A war bow requires lots of strength, far more than using a sword or spear
We're not talking exclusively about heavy bows, but even in the case of those, you still need more skill than strength. Being able to pull the string efficiently means nothing if you can't aim properly or trace down targets (and yes, you need to aim in a volley)
>and the level of skill of an archer is much lower than a professional swordsman
this is just nonsense... professional archers trained for life, and being an effective swordsman took far less than being a competent archer in medieval times.
>No we dont usually have spear fights in the 21st century you autist
then shut the fuck up, at least you could try to watch some videos on the matter, you'll realize that in order to fight with a spear you need to move a lot
>No we dont usually have spear fights in the 21st century you autist
take your head out of the gutter for a sec, just imagine yourself fighting to death with another person with a pointy stick... if not agile enough you could even lose your spear

>Yea Forumstard decides what to play based on pseudoscience

A "light bow" is mostly good for skewering unarmored chucklefucks that are also peasants, like yourself, and hunting game.

That or just in general when you are in a situation in which nobody really has solid armor.

You need quite a good bow to deal with "fuck, this guy has armor".

Knights and Men at Arms also trained for life with swords and other sharp instruments. Maybe killing people who you would really be killing with a sword in numbers like mowing down peasants was easier, but they did realistically assume they would get in sword fights with other highly trained users, including at say, tournaments.

But yeah, you are right, the best analogy for spear fighting, bayonet fighting, requires some deftness. You are dodging and weaving and being all nimbly pimbly to stick the other guy first. It's not just standing there. You also use the back end some.