Fire, slash... slash, fire!

[Cygnus Q'ol]

Would it be feasible, and are there any advantages of being able to brandish a pistol and a melee simultaneously?

 

Some say, Yes.

Some say, No.

 

Me, I use whatever gets the job done.

I might try it for novelty's sake.

[Robb Stark]

I suggested this long long ago before TSL came out and everyone laughed at me.

 

My thought was holding an off-hand saber for blaster bolt deflection and a blaster for actual combat. Nobody saw any reason for holding a saber for defensive purposes only and instead envisioned trying to attack with the saber and blaster simultaneously which would obviously have devastating consequences.

 

As for a melee weapon other than a saber, I think it would be fine too but focusing mostly on its use as a defensive weapon against an enemy using a melee attack.

 

Maybe something like this:

Off-hand melee weapon with a main-hand blaster has -4 Attack on top of the normal dual-wield penalty, but eliminates the defense penalty against melee attacks when wielding a ranged weapon. In addition, a small off-hand weapon adds a +2 to melee defense. So it is useful as a defensive strategy, and you can attack with it at melee range, but not as effectively as if you were dual-wielding two melees.

[Rediy]

Why not just add that silly looking energy shields that were used in Episode I. I dunno, it all seems sort of... unnecesary.

 

This sounds more like something that belongs in a Warhammer 40,000 RPG than Star Wars.

[Cygnus Q'ol]

I suggested this long long ago before TSL came out and everyone laughed at me.

 

My thought was holding an off-hand saber for blaster bolt deflection and a blaster for actual combat. Nobody saw any reason for holding a saber for defensive purposes only and instead envisioned trying to attack with the saber and blaster simultaneously which would obviously have devastating consequences.

 

As for a melee weapon other than a saber, I think it would be fine too but focusing mostly on its use as a defensive weapon against an enemy using a melee attack.

 

Maybe something like this:

Off-hand melee weapon with a main-hand blaster has -4 Attack on top of the normal dual-wield penalty, but eliminates the defense penalty against melee attacks when wielding a ranged weapon. In addition, a small off-hand weapon adds a +2 to melee defense. So it is useful as a defensive strategy, and you can attack with it at melee range, but not as effectively as if you were dual-wielding two melees.

 

I was thinking something on the same lines.

A short saber, loaded with blaster bolt deflection and defensive upgrades in the off hand, while wielding an upgraded Static-electric or Mandalorian heavy pistol with master percision to go up against those force users who are foolish enough to think the force can save them.

[JediMaster12]

Not a bad suggestion and I'm not laughing. I often thought what it would be like to brandish a melee (or saber) and a blaster in attack. I've tried actual simulations with my brother to see if feasible and it is. It could add a little flavor to the game.

The Jedi Master agrees!

[Vladimir-Vlada]

I remember suggesting this also. But not as good as you people. I agree.

[lukeiamyourdad]

It's not good balancing. So no.

[Vladimir-Vlada]

It's not good balancing. So no.

Why? It's just to improve the looks. And you won't be shooting and sword-fighting at the same time. You can sycle through the attack options and see "Attack Melee" or "Attack Ranged", it really isn't that bad. Maybe it could slow you down, like decrease Dexterity by 1 and decrease Fortitude. It's not so bad if you ask me.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Oh yeah, it is. The disadvantage of using blasters as a Jedi instead of lightsabers is mainly the blaster bolt deflection capabilities. In TSL, the blasters were heavily improved in attack power, thus that fact became more obvious.

 

It might not be more powerful than using two sabers, but it's blurring the line too much between melee and ranged.

Add to that, single saber wielders are even weaker.

Worst is personnal shields are rendered nearly useless. What's the point of using a shield with a blaster now?

 

Besides, it frankly looks stupid. Nobody can decently fight that way.

[Vladimir-Vlada]

It's just an option, you know.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Sure it is, but what good is an option if people don't use it? Even in Single player.

 

If I find it worthless to use x weapon or x skill or x anything, I won't. With options like these, we could just forget about single saber wielders.

[Vladimir-Vlada]

If I find it worthless to use x weapon or x skill or x anything, I won't. With options like these, we could just forget about single saber wielders.

You can equip whatever you want even if the ability to wield both melee and range weapon at the same time. It's a matter of will, you can equip a single saber, no one will complain; Some people would like to have a Melee and a Ranged weapon at the same time, but that they are not forced to it by the programming.

[Mono_Giganto]

But it eliminates the logical point of using a single saber, when you can use one and a blaster.

[RedHawke]

^^^^

*Blam... Blam!* "So uncivilized!"

 

But seriously, in the PnP RPG your character either is armed for Ranged or Melee combat, usually you cannot do both...

 

If they were to implement this you could expect some stiff penalties to your Reflex Saves, Blaster Bolt Deflection and To-Hit rolls, possibly even partial or total loss of your Dexterity based Defense Bonus... too much penalty for too little reward IMO.

[Liit Orda]

I think it'd be cool. I mean there was a guy in Tenchu who used a sword and a shotgun and that worked like a beast, you know? Some amazing moves to be done.

[Cygnus Q'ol]

^^^^

*Blam... Blam!* "So uncivilized!"

 

But seriously, in the PnP RPG your character either is armed for Ranged or Melee combat, usually you cannot do both...

 

If they were to implement this you could expect some stiff penalties to your Reflex Saves, Blaster Bolt Deflection and To-Hit rolls, possibly even partial or total loss of your Dexterity based Defense Bonus... too much penalty for too little reward IMO.

 

Perhaps, but it would still be the choice of the player. Sometimes you have to take a penalty to get an edge elsewhere.

 

...and if you want to be a single hilt player, then, by all means, go right ahead.

 

Some of us like to experiment in all kinds of disposal methods.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Perhaps' date=' but it would still be the choice of the player. Sometimes you have to take a penalty to get an edge elsewhere.[/quote']

 

But if the penalty is too great, would you even consider using it? You might try it out for one or two fights and realize it's not worth it.

 

...and if you want to be a single hilt player' date=' then, by all means, go right ahead.[/quote']

 

That's not the point. They have a hard time already balancing dual, double and single. No need for a third one jumping in and unbalancing everything even more.

 

 

Some of us like to experiment in all kinds of disposal methods.

 

It seems like this is the usual answer. However, balancing is important, whether it be MP or SP. It might seem to affect MP more, but I like my SP games to be also balanced.

Right now, there's virtually no reason why anyone, non-hardcore, should play with a single saber. Some polls on the official site show this. It's only:"Dual or double blade?" Rarely do we get to see single.

Why? Because single blade users are definitely weaker then dual or double. Their advantages are puny. +3 attack and +3 defense with Master Dueling. That's a tiny advantage compared to the sheer damage a double-blade can inflict. Even if the +3 to attack and +3 to defense come into play, the second the double-blader touches you, you're screwed.

It's the same for dual blade users.

 

Add to that the ability to wield a blaster and a saber for both ranged and melee. So unless there's some major penalties, here's another option to pound single saberists to the ground.

 

But it's just an option you'll say...no, it isn't just an option. That oversimplifies eveything. You'd have to remember that if you can do that, enemy NPCs can do it too. What if it's really overpowered and the AI is smart enough to use it efficiently? It'll be fun.

 

But enough about balance, has anyone thought of how weird it would look? How can a Jedi concentrate on aiming correctly and blocking at the same time?

Sure, they do have melee and ranged mixed in other games. Warhammer 40K for example. But does the Space Marine Commander block enemy fire while shooting back? No.

It simply is too unrealistic to even be considered.

[Bob Lion54]

I would say no. Apart from looking silly, it would require more animations.

 

Animations take time to create. Instead of making an animation for a charactor with a melee weapon and a blaster, they could make add more variety to the existing animations. Such as a few more "flurry" animations or whatnot. Perhaps they could even add different animations for the different sabre styles.

 

That would be a better use of their time, in my opinion.

[Robb Stark]

Look we practically already have a combined melee/ranged attack already:

 

Ever used Force Storm, Force Wave, Destroy Droid, etc. with a lightsaber in your hand? Those are all ranged attack against *MULTIPLE* enemies that also enable you to defend against melee attacks and blaster fire. Heck you can attack an opponent at melee range with a saber in one round and then fry him with lightning in the next. The most unbalanced aspect of both games is being able to stand completely still and spam Force Waves destroying every enemy on screen long before running out of VP or FP. So a ranged/melee combo is not a balance issue. Really.

 

The question is whether a dual-wield ranged/melee combo makes sense as a way real people/Jedi could and would fight, and whether players would use it often enough to justify implementing it in the game. *I* would use it from time to time simply because the concept/look of it is cool to me. If not enough people would use it then it would be a waste to put in the game and get it to work.

 

(Which, incidentally, wouldn't really be that hard. Imagine four buttons in the attack Target Menu rather than three: Melee, Ranged, Force Powers, Grenades. If you don't have a melee or ranged weapon equipped then that option is blacked out. During the defense portion of each round you see the defense animation of either defending against a melee attack with your melee weapon, and/or deflecting a blaster bolt with your saber...that is absolutely no different than what we currently have with a Jedi who has selected a Force power and is waiting for his attack portion of the round. During the attack portion of each round you attack with *EITHER* your ranged weapon or your melee weapon, depending on which option you select in the Target Menu. Depending on the range of your target and the weapon you selected, you attack as if single-wielding that kind of weapon, but applying a dual-wielding penalty and whatever penalty there exists for mismatched wielding. If you dual-wield the same kind of weapon (melee or ranged) then attacks function as they do currently.)

 

And really, if doing the animations for dual wielding ranged and melee weapons together only takes away from five more Flurry, Critical Strike, and Power Attack animations each, I'm all for it. Next thing we'll get is the screen flashing purple, pink, and yellow with fireworks and the screen shaking when a critical hit is scored, followed by the screen splattering with blood that runs slowly down and an evil laugh. But I suspect for many people that alone would make KOTOR3 the best game ever.

[Cygnus Q'ol]

Alright, so not everyone agrees, oh well, that's the way of the universe.

 

I'm one who likes options. If they decide to place these types of options in the game, then I'll explore them.

 

If not, then I'll find other ways to eliminate my enemies.

 

I'll tell you one thing, IMO, the next game won't be the same old thing. I believe the next gen Kotor will have a few surprises for all of us. Yes, even those of you who think you have seen the future.

Another thing, when I come across a single blade saberist, he'd better have the force as his ally.

 

...and even that may not be enough.

[Vladimir-Vlada]

But if the penalty is too great, would you even consider using it?

Now if they wanted to insert that. Would they do such a thing?

 

Even if the +3 to attack and +3 to defense come into play, the second the double-blader touches you, you're screwed.

I never got beaten by a double-bladed wielder. And if I never got beaten, Why would anyone else be? Maybe you just didn't improve your character as good as you thought.

 

Add to that the ability to wield a blaster and a saber for both ranged and melee. So unless there's some major penalties, here's another option to pound single saberists to the ground.

That doesn't mean that. You just have to think what abilities are you going to use.

 

But it's just an option you'll say...no, it isn't just an option. You'd have to remember that if you can do that, enemy NPCs can do it too. What if it's really overpowered and the AI is smart enough to use it efficiently? It'll be fun.

Now you are over exagerating.

 

A.I.'s are not that smart and no NPC would wield such a thing, because NPC's are mostly unoriginal minds that doesn't really think or aim correctly.

 

But enough about balance, has anyone thought of how weird it would look? How can a Jedi concentrate on aiming correctly and blocking at the same time?

HEY! You said that. Not us.

 

But does the Space Marine Commander block enemy fire while shooting back?

No, because he doesn't have the correct polarity of a electron field projecting shield, nor does he have a Xenon stick that is ionicly positive, while the projectiles are also positive; making them deflect because of the positive ions from both sides.

 

It simply is too unrealistic to even be considered.

Who says that Star Wars is real?

 

Animations take time to create. Instead of making an animation for a charactor with a melee weapon and a blaster, they could make add more variety to the existing animations.

People don't get money for the time they've spent making something, they get money for the things made.

[Mono_Giganto]

Yeah, and if they spend that much time making animations for this, as well as animations for other things, and saber forms, and improve the engine, and fix bugs, and try to simultaneously make a good story..... The game won't make its deadline, and thus, they won't be getting too much money for what they made. An animation, let alone an entire set, is not something that can be created in a matter of minutes. "It's not a routine procedure, but an artform." To quote svösh. Especially human animations like these.

[Bob Lion54]

People don't get money for the time they've spent making something, they get money for the things made.

Not really. If you take the time to make something well, you can charge more for it then if you do not.

 

Games are somewhat different in that most new games sale for about $50. However, in the long term my statement holds true. If the game is rushed, once people hear its not good, the sales will drop and the price will drop. If they take the time and make it well, they can keep selling it for $50 for a longer period of time, thus making a higher profit.

 

Ergo, your statement is false in most, though unfortunately not all, instances.

[Vladimir-Vlada]

The game won't make its deadline, and thus, they won't be getting too much money for what they made. An animation, let alone an entire set, is not something that can be created in a matter of minutes.

If the game is rushed, once people hear its not good, the sales will drop and the price will drop.

What? For one animation a set of them and a delay??? That's ridicoulous.

[Mono_Giganto]

A set isn't one animation. A set is many animations. And it's not ridiculous when you're arguing over a LucasArts game. They get rushed anyway. And from OE's (OE being the likely candidate for K3.) work on K2, it definitely seems that they're geared towards engine improvements and better models and animations - before the story/bug fixes. Which means that they would likely create new animations/models first, then get to the story last. They could barely get K2 out as a working game in time. To do the same again in addition to an entire set of animations... Well, it won't get the game done in time for a deadline. Animations take a long time. That's why Nihilus uses recycled animations. That's why most models in the game are built on a shared skeleton, so there is no need to animate everything on its own. You can't make natural-looking animations like you can make an item on KotOR Tool.

 

You will also notice in my post, that I never said the animations alone would cause a failure to meet a deadline. OE has enough trouble getting everything into the game on time as it is, and adding more, especially something as time consuming as animtations, is going to take up the time they could be fixing some of the bugs or improving the story.