One of my favourite games was in fortress stuck behind enemy lines without ammo (bolter armed traitor) had been snipping from the walls decided to take out the devastators lobbing plasma at me but didn't check my ammo used the last few rounds to aerate a loyalist inside the sanctuary while heading for lifts. Managed to kill 5 devastators all focused on down range with my trusty combat knife before the dark gods claimed me. Gutted as a crash prevented me from seeing my final tally of scalps.
They're already fixing the Dbash+Evade+Backstab mechanic so that it can be countered/canceled. So that whole topic is basically a moot point.
Been saying this more than once. It's a cheap mechanic gameplay wise and it doesn't make any sense logic wise. The skill level argument is utter bullshit... how is it a skill level to lock on to some dude and roll around until you're behind him? Or how is it a skill level to jump on someone in melee with someone else and hit him in the back like a cheap coward.
They are working on patching out the dodge behind part, this was mentioned right above yours. So in combat you have to royally screw up to get backstabbed, or not be paying attention.
I know that, but being in combat and having no chance to dodge or even notice an incoming backstab from someone else has nothing to do with not paying attention.
it has everything to do with that. Slight latency-wise and assuming you got reflexes to act. That's not cowardeness to hit the weak spot of an enemy who was foolish enough to open you some. If you are duelling with someone and it turns into a 30 secs long rollfest aiming for the back, i am sorry, but you play melee entirely wrong and will be reckt by any decent player, as you deserve to be. You are not saying you are removing depth layer from combat and thinking it will improve the skill ceiling for melee, aren't you? Its easy only against people below "good" melee level. Which are most tacticals, devs and some amounts of shieldbro. It is completely impossible against decent melee player(without them having nice and amazing duel against you first). Also, i don't understand what short back stagger you are talking about since you can evade directly after first attack hitting you. Well, i can evade. Never have allowed more then one attack in my back in a short sequence.
Actually I consider myself a pretty decent player and I usually end up amongst the top 5 so yeah, I doubt I play melee entirely wrong. Why is it even a weak spot? There's no logical reason why our backs are weak spots. If anything it should be even more protected because theres a backpack on top of the armour. How does the backstabbing add a depth layer? Or how does it improve the skill ceiling? it does add nothing to the game other than being downed with 2 chainsaw hits to the back you couldn't see coming at all and had no way of countering them. If anything it dumbs the game down, even more than it already is. It's gonna be fun to see all the "skillful" Striking Scorpions sitting in corners and around edges cloaked waiting for anyone to pass by and then hitting their backs two times and run off to the next corner. Coming from behind is not flanking.... it's coming from behind. And again it has nothing to do with not being aware because you simply can't see anyone charging from behind, because apparently that's not the direction we look at for some reason.
There is also a blind spot there which means enemy have the opportunity on hitting you wherever he wants, which means he can aim for a weak spot(between the plates , for instance) and you won't know which one. I mean, c'mon, there is no point to applying logic to video games because depending on assumptions you make you can explain everything, its useless. It creates a positioning layer to the game, no? When there is a difference from where to strike it adds a variable to the game, no? Are you saying when there is no difference from which side to attack it won't hurt the skill required to melee? The number of variables to keep in mind? Oh, if you haven't seen coming the attack, you deserve to die for not paying attention to the surroundings or for your enemy being so cool for conceiling himself. Also, if you suffer two chainsword attacks 100% of the time(if you can't evade after first one lag-excluded), you are doing it wrong. Cause i can. And i am not the special snowflake here. That is called a counter, cause you still have options after that, though suffered a penalty. Basically, yeah, it would be fun. You are asking to lower the floor by eliminating positioning element from melee and by lessening the need to keep an eye on your surroundings, diminishing the game into more arcadish state. Thanks, no.
The skill level point comes from multiple things. 1, Being able to out maneuver multiple opponents and capitalize on catching them off guard. 2, It provides a basis for smart flanking being useful and people using their brain approaching targets or 2 on 1 fights. 3, Stealth or covert gameplay benefits from having a kill zone. 4, Teamwork in ambushes etc, benefit from having a soft spot they can target, this would be good on vehicles too. Despite what you insinuate it makes 3 on 1 situations winnable and that takes skill in melee. Why is the back more damaging in a fight? Spine Kidneys Back of the Neck Back of the head. Other common killzones for a martial artists or hand to hand combat are the temple, or the center of the chest (where many major blood vessels are) See above and then please tell me why it dumbs something down. Flanking can be attacking from the sides. It can also be the process of moving around the enemy to gain position, or above them for that matter.
