How did we reach the straight swords = strength and curved sword = dexterity standard in videogames?

How did we reach the straight swords = strength and curved sword = dexterity standard in videogames?

Attached: shamshir-persian-sabre.jpg (1400x1600, 87.18K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=h3BShfhygbk
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

With a Rune Scimitar

Attached: rune.jpg (2432x4320, 813.23K)

it just makes sense

>Skill = dex
>Exotic looking
>haaaa you gonna need more skill for that son! look at that fancy thing!

curved swords were used by lightly armored soldiers

>this is the Shamshir in EldenRing
So fucking disappointed, wtf were they thinking

Attached: shamshir.png (200x200, 8.76K)

Yo I think I have that exact sword

asked this question to an expert guy at a medieval exhibition once
I'll tell you what the guy told me
>Straight swords are made for straight strikes, are heavier usually not very sharp, you use them to bonk into armor
>curved swords are much lighter, much sharper, but you need to slice the opponent, say connect with opponent and pull it back to the blade slices the flesh if that makes sense opposed to a normal strike. These are usually a lot less durable and pretty usual in armored combat because it's useless once the blade loses its sharpness and requires dexterity to cut through exposes spots like back of knee, armpit, crotch.
Guy went on to say a lot more cool stuff about them but that's what I remember.

Real combat is way too complex to accurately depict everything you can do with any of these weapons, their different roles and the many fighting styles. Not to mention that straight and curved swords come in different shapes, sizes and weights that can shift how you'd want to effectively use them.
Instead, they focus on giving these types of weapons specific roles to make choices matter and facilitate certain builds and in general themes and archetypes.

Attached: d2c9557f629d79ee9f32835a3b95b1cd.jpg (2048x1448, 229.46K)

There's no such thing as a dex weapon. Maybe urumi or some shit but that's about it.

Incorrect. The truth is that every weapon is a dex weapon. The single most important thing in wielding any weapon is being able to handle the thing.

idk how old you are user, but if you're old enough to read and write you may have noticed that dexterity irl doesn't mean the same thing as it does in video games

I'm pretty sure being able to lift and swing the thing comes first.

There are essentially no historical weapons the average person couldn't easily lift and swing just fine. Endurance is far more of a problem in swinging heavy bits of metal around than strength.

A straight sword's best attack is a thrust though.

The Shamshir in OP weighs less than 1 Kg
A standard Scottish Claymore weighs ~3 Kg
A baby could lift those

Scimitar
>slashy, not stabby
>must be Dex
Katana
>slashy and stabby
>yeah that's Dex
Longsword
>slashy and stabby, no bend
>Str
Rapier
>stabby, not slashy, no bend
>fuck it, Dex again

>in one video game
WAOowwwww!!! so cooll!!

>in videogames
just say souls, we know youre talking about souls

Not really melee but the longbow

This is Yea Forums not /his/, when the weapons include giant stone slabs with a handle bolted on you can't ignore it.

Fair. Ranged weapons are mostly strength, you're right.

Swords were like 3lbs dude and knights were shorter than 5'8" and weren't weightlifters.

On the contrary, you can ignore it because it's a videogame.

>DEX builds are the most braindead L2 spam heavy builds
>STR builds actually require skill and timing to pull off successfully
What did Miyazaki mean by this?

straight sword = straight = heterosexual = testosterone = strength
curved sword = curved = not straight = homosexual = dextrous acts of fellatio

"STR" in Souls games is supernatural anime strength from soul arts or rune JO energy.

>roll attack spam over and over
>skill

100% agree. The whole point of a sharp sword is that it doesn't require as much raw force as a club to do a great amount of damage. As long as you have enough strength to lift and wield a sword properly you really do not need additional strength. Skill. "dex", is a lot more important.
But that is really only when we talk about sword technique. In a real combat situation, strength is obviously a great advantage.

>Using a sword to bonk into armour
The guy you talked to is retarded. A straight sword thrusts, which is the best move in any kind of fencing because it's fast, has the best possible reach, it's difficult to counter and is a better move vs shields.
Vs armour the only kind of sword you use is either a spadone or a longsword, because the first is basically used as a polearm made to counter pikes and the latter can be used with 2 different styles of grips developed specifically to turn it into a mace and to achieve better thrust control so you may stab a weak spot.

Curved swords, like sabers, are great for dueling opponents who wear little or no armour, which is why they were popular when guns were used regularly and heavy armour was obsolete.

>Real combat situation

Why would I need to be strong in a gunfight?

Curved swords are significantly easier to handle and were primarily given to less experienced soldiers because you literally cannot fuck them up
especially cavalry, using a curved sword on cavalry is just u swinging and as long u don't try to bonk people and put the blade reasonably in their direction, they just get cut and its all g
but they have the huge disadvantage of being a lot more work to maintain and needing more regular maintenance as well as much more prone to breaking

but the thing is, straight swords, especially in a cavalry scenario like described, are incredibly more difficult to use, in fact without significant training, trying to do the standard ride by and swing on a lad, a straight sword was likely to get stuck in the fella and either you lose your grip on the blade and lose it, or you get pulled off your horse, either way, big issue
even for ground to ground fighting it was the same, way easier to use a curved sword where the curve makes cutting effortless and all the power is focused on a single point, maximizing shearing force, compared to straight swords where u need a lot of skill to achieve a similar effect.
straight blades obviously had some serious advantages though, and obviously took less maintenance, were far more versatile, and just generally better for a lot of things, but damn were they harder to use.

If anything, your standard swords should be dex weapons and curved blades should be str, since all u need to do with them is swing and shit gets fucked up

"Real" combat is a myth. You really think noblemen just lined up and let themselves be killed for no reason? How would you ever convince anyone to go in the front line? Come on, medieval "combat" was just the two sides looking at who had the biggest army and maybe bribing each other to say they took the loss. This was common knowledge until history "buffs" in the 1800's started to rewrite history to sell museum tickets.

>Swords are good against armour when you use them as a club

I love the mordhau and short grip stuff. But come on

Because in real combat being able to sprint while lugging around 20kg of ammo, supplies, and weapons is more important than fancy quick reloads or a bit of extra aiming skill.

But the biggest game right now generally has Strength and Dex variants of both weapons.
If one were to separate curved swords from straight swords based on their damage type then they can have whatever stat spread they want. If damage types are properly allocated based on the moveset then curveds would have more damage on slashes while straights would deal more on thrusts, or alternatively have same damage on thrusts but one does better against armor somehow.

They're not ideal but it's still way better than trying to cut through steel plate, which is just not going to happen.
But swords were mostly secondary weapons on the battlefield anyway, polearms were king.

No the thrust is also the exact move you want to use against an armoured opponent, you want to ram it into the gaps of their plate. Blunt strikes with a sword on heavy armour do far less than internet historians would have you think. Most blunt weapons (warhammer and mace) were primarily used on horseback as a side arm.

Straight swords were't swung from horseback, they were used to stab, the same way you'd use a lance. Look at pre-WW1 era cavalry swords and they're all basically big spikes with a handle

>Sparring video vs mordhau in full plate
>Taps out after the first hit in the head and says he's about to throw up

Seemed reasonable to me even if I can't provide a source right now

straight swords are more soulful

>because the first is basically used as a polearm made to counter pikes and the latter can be used with 2 different styles of grips developed specifically to turn it into a mace

You're a retarded HEMA larper who thinks medieval meme manuals represented actual combat.

Because it is a video game and games need systems and rules in order to function.

>Look at pre-WW1 era cavalry swords and they're all basically big spikes with a handle
Cavalrymen were literally told to aim for the left ear, retard. You don't thrust a sword from fucking horseback and cavarlymen did not carry straight swords that weren't ornaments.

guy was def not a retard, what you're saying he told us too but that in actual battle they were made to be versatile as be useful after they lost their sharpness/broke, he even showed us how they'd thrust into armor weakspots and how the tips were more fragile than the rest of the blade in case it got stuck and they had to break the tip to keep going and how they'd switch into essentially a mace as the fight went on and how the hilt was very used to finish people off after they made the opponent lose their balance
guy was cool a, even showed us logs from battles and medieval swordfighting textbooks, records etc
No idea why you think you know more than an actual historian expert but I guess you're on 4ch for a reason idk

youtube.com/watch?v=h3BShfhygbk
guess who's the retard

>1914 cavalry
Hence non-ornamental, faggot. Those morons didn't use those in combat, a lance at most.

no need to be so upset about being wrong

how did sword become the main stream weapon anyway?
when every battle are fought with spears

If you hit someone in the head or chest with a stark blunt object and they're wearing armour they are at the very least hurt, dazzled, out of breath or in serious pain. If you try and use your reach to stab a knight in full plate into the structural weakness of his armour with anything shorter than a Scottish claymore he's just gonna fucking grab your weapon with his ironclad hand and hit you with his Warhammer/outreach you with his halberd/laugh from the top of his horse as you get fucking impaled at 60km/h.
People in heavy armour usually lived through all or most of their battles for a variety of reasons, both practical and societal. The most likely way they'd be taken out is by cavalry, artillery, guns and crossbows.
Sword stabs did fuck all.

It's an interpretation of how much the strength of the strike vs. the precision of the strike affects the effectiveness of the weapon.
Because curved swords are slashing weapons and fucking useless against even shitty armor, the precision and speed of your attacks are what will actually let you kill people through their armor, instead of just fucking your blade up by trying to smash someone with it as hard as possible. Those swords are typically too light and don't have the inertia to do damage that way, so the focus is targetting unarmored areas.
On the other end of the spectrum, European swords are heavier because they're for bonking people in platemail. In this scenario, the strength of the swing is almost all that matters, and the heaviness of the sword actually helps, provided you can actually swing it. This also led to retarded but effective martial techniques like pic related.
At some point, people figured out that you might as well just make skinnier, rigid blades that can either puncture armor or fit through gaps in armor, which is where the rapier and estoc come in. Alternatively, you can add puncturing spikes on a big fucking hammer, which is why maces evolved over time until they became the ultimate weaponfu: the lucerne hammer.
Thanks for reading my blog.

Attached: Augsburg_Cod.I.6.4%C2%BA.2_%28Codex_Wallerstein%29_107v.jpg (1228x819, 480.56K)

looks like different kind of lion's "tail" lmoa

>At some point, people figured out that you might as well just make skinnier, rigid blades that can either puncture armor or fit through gaps in armor, which is where the rapier and estoc come in.
Nigger those were mostly for civilian use/dueling. You'd never fight a knight in full plate with a rapier on teh battlefield.

>which is the best move in any kind of fencing because it's fast, has the best possible reach, it's difficult to counter and is a better move vs shields
Shit, I guess the state of ER PvP makes sense then

The sword is the only instrument of war used only for war and therefore is considered the noblest.
You hunt and fish with spears and bows. Cut wood with axes. Build stuff with hammers. Swords are exclusively made to kill other humans.

Its actually very close to irl

Bows need enough strength to be able to wield the thing properly but once you get to that threshold, making more accurate strikes on weak points is what makes you deal more damage. Dex is frequently used as the general purpose finesse/accuracy stat so bows end up being Dex weapons or that reason.

STR or DEX?

Attached: 20201021151119-jpg.jpg (1000x1000, 29.44K)

pure SEX

Shouldn't all swords be dex ?
With only the heaviest swords be str ?