Dual wield

[Reaper]

Fire two targets simultaneously with the two guns, like this:

[grisamentum]

Hard to balance. Mathematically it’s either going to be either superior or inferior to normal melee or normal guns. You can try to balance it in certain ways like “but it uses more ammo!” or “but it requires more skill points!” but these don’t work. Similarly, the player is ultimately going to have whatever weapons he wants in the long run.

Max damage output is one of the most important factors in any roguelike. If the player can ultimately put out way more damage using a certain skill, then the game has to be balanced against that.

For that reason, I just don’t think dual wield is a good idea. If it’s good and you don’t use it, you’re gimping yourself. If it’s bad, you shouldn’t use it anyway.

Realism-wise, dual wield is just dumb. In real life, you will always get more damage using a single weapon, except for perhaps the very first shots in two pistols, even at point blank range.

[Reaper]

Realism-wise, dual wield is just dumb. In real life, you will always get more damage using a single weapon

I agree.

Hard to balance

Make a large penalty to accuracy and larger recoil. Balancing it for use at point blank range, as you say.

[Weyrling]

[quote=“Reaper, post:3, topic:1268”]

Realism-wise, dual wield is just dumb. In real life, you will always get more damage using a single weapon

I agree.

Hard to balance

Make a large penalty to accuracy and larger recoil. Balancing it for use at point blank range, as you say.[/quote] A major accuracy penalty with high recoil hardly matters if you're surrounded on all sides so it would have its niche.

On the other hand, multiple melee weapons can actually be far more effective than a single melee weapon, depending highly on the weapon(s) in question, so I would definitely agree with the basic idea, but balancing it and making it work properly is a lot of hassle so I would rate this as “Would be awesome, but low priority”.

One thing of note, firing at two targets simultaneously is ridiculous for (normal) humans, as we have binocular vision.
I don’t know how far the mutation system will eventually go, so maybe this will stop being so ridiculous if you grow additional eyes or something.

[AerialK7]

sits down and trys to think of weapons that would be effective with duel wield Maybe short swords or daggers if properly trained and coordinated? (Like being ambidextrous)

[Nopkar]

I don’t see this as being beneficial for cataclysm. maybe a shield system with off hand items that way but honestly two daggers, two swords/axes/hammers (more than enough weapons for everyone) is really kind of ridiculous.

maybe two guns? I know there’d be people dumb enough to do this. accuracy/ammo usage is just out of the park.

absurd accuracy penalties for firing at two enemies, increasing (in a linear fashion? exponential could get out of hand) as the distance between the two increases.

a single enemy still incurs a hefty penalty, never being higher than a character half as skilled with a single gun. (maybe some traits could offset this but I don’t ever see someone being as accurate with two weapons as with one. it’s just game breaking)

so conclusively this is a CQB style. this is already filled with shotguns and SMG’s which are arguably sufficient to render any enemy giblets.

maybe you could convince someone to do it, but i’m fine without it. (this isn’t a ‘No! this’ll never work!’ statement, but simply put i can’t see it happening. maybe try to convince a coder?)

[Weyrling]

I don’t see this as being beneficial for cataclysm. maybe a shield system with off hand items that way but honestly two daggers, two swords/axes/hammers (more than enough weapons for everyone) is really kind of ridiculous.

The primary bonus of wielding a melee weapon in your offhand is defensive, but not definitively so.

Wielding a sword and a dagger is more effective than a sword alone, and if you get your sword stuck in a zombie, you aren’t completely defenseless. This depends on the sword of course, wielding a longsword or broadsword in one hand is far easier than wielding a katana (or a claymore) in one hand unless you can easily wield a sledgehammer as a weapon.

Two knives is better than one, since blocking a dirty zombie bite with your hand/arm isn’t such a great idea, and it isn’t particularly harder to hold two knives rather than one.

Considering axes, hammers, spears, wheels. and all the other (potential) melee weapons we have, a moves-per-attack modifier based on weight, dexterity, and strength would make sense.
Some combinations are just very unwieldy and/or would require a great amount of strength and dexterity to even pretend to use.

[Reaper]

One thing of note, firing at two targets simultaneously is ridiculous for (normal) humans, as we have binocular vision.

if the second goal out of sight, yes. If both targets in line of sight it possibly. Example: __Z___ ____z_ ______ __@__ Can fire.

Z_
__@_z

---

---

If first target - Z, change to hit to z very low.

Z

---

@
_z
Can’t file.

[GunnerX]

[quote=“Weyrling, post:4, topic:1268”]One thing of note, firing at two targets simultaneously is ridiculous for (normal) humans, as we have binocular vision.
I don’t know how far the mutation system will eventually go, so maybe this will stop being so ridiculous if you grow additional eyes or something.[/quote]

Well, for one thing if you get 4 arms (tentacles), you already get extra “off-hand” attacks as I recall. But then you are potentially opening up the whole quad wielding, etc. thing.

sits down and trys to think of weapons that would be effective with duel wield Maybe short swords or daggers if properly trained and coordinated? (Like being ambidextrous)

Any number of martial arts weapons can/are used this way, but at that point you could just make a weapon that is “pair of XXXX” and give it the stats and tags to reflect it.

RE: OP
Typically even when weapons are used in each hand only one is being used offensively at any given point. The main benefit of dual-wielding is usually the speed one can react from a defensive block, and the additional additional feinting options. In fact when it boils down to it using a shield is effectively dual-wielding. Even When fighting bare-handed, one attacks with one arm at a time. You almost never see anyone throw a punch with both hands at the same time, because doing so prevents putting any real body power behind it (try and throw a punch straight ahead without any hip and shoulder motion). Even when it is done it is going to be more of a push, or maybe a double handed hammer blow.

As far as firearms go, it’s really more of the same thing. You might cover your left side with one gun, and the right with the other, and you might even fire both at the same target. If you are really good, you might be able to lay down some cover fire with one while picking your shots with the other, but there is really no way you can aim at two targets simultaneously. The basic thing IRL (as opposed to D&D) is that the human mind can really only operate one thought process at a given time “multitasking” is just how fast one can switch between different ones without critical data loss. So dual-wielding doesn’t really give you more “attacks per round” it just gives you different options. Even without a second weapon one can always punch with their off-hand, or even kick. These kind of things can just be assumed to be part of the abstraction of the games combat system.

[Reaper]

GunnerX.
It should work like this:

from 5:40

[AerialK7]

Well…If there was two things straight at you. You could sorta line one up for a body shot (easy to hit) line the other up and fire. But itd just be as easy to “shoot, turn, shoot”

[Reaper]

AerialK7
I’m not sure that you are well understood.

Fire with two hands faster and we can do more shots - in two guns more ammo than in one.
Of course we need more time to reload, and we shots with less accuracy.

Z_Z
ZZ
@
In this situation we can kill all zombies in 2 turn. (If all the shots get into target)
If you shoot one time per turn would have to run, but if:
#Z_Z#
#ZZ#
#@__#

?

[i2amroy]

I would like to point out for realism’s sake that your accuracy with dual wielding guns is incredibly low. Like “not only do you miss most of your shots with your second weapon, but you also miss many more shots with your first weapon as well”, levels. There is a reason why this type of wielding only shows up in videogames/movies, it’s because 99.9% of the time you will be able to do more damage firing one gun and hitting them two guns with mostly misses. In fact with modern guns and shooting styles, not only will you be able to hit more often, but in many cases you are actually able to fire more bullets with a single gun wielded with two hands then two guns wielded each with one, simply because your body can recover from the recoil faster and is able to track and aim faster.

Pretty much the only exception to the above is when your target is within 5-10 feet, in which case the decrease in accuracy is not as large of a factor and dual wielding becomes more favorable. Regardless of this just about the only real life example of this is the “macedonian shooting style” previously practiced by Russian special forces, and in that case the goal of the style wasn’t to actually hit your targets, rather it was to scare your targets enough to force them to take cover.

As a note if you ever want to see how hard dual wielding actually is, find one of those old two-player arcade games that only needs one hand to reload (for example by shooting below the screen rather then pump action). Then try to play it by yourself. Now imagine what it would be like if those guns actually had recoil. Hint: It’s EXTREMELY difficult to do even mediocre at.)

[GunnerX]

[quote=“Reaper, post:12, topic:1268”]Fire with two hands faster and we can do more shots - in two guns more ammo than in one.
Of course we need more time to reload, and we shots with less accuracy.[/quote]

Just put an auto-fire and double clip mod on one pistol and carry the other around for style, you’ll get pretty much the same effect.

It would be a more accurate representation of blazing away with two pistols in a spray a pray fashion. And I still maintain you can’t aim at two things at once. Choreography aside, in the vid the guy had plenty of time to rehearse in his mind exactly how to move each arm individually to achieve the effect. In a real(?) “Oh F*** zombies are coming at me!” situation you would either just unload, or alternate fire between the two guns, using the one most suitable for the nearest target.

In any case, in game, you should really be moving to reduce the recoil on your guns anyway.

[Reaper]

GunnerX
The meaning dual wield of the rapid shooting of targets at almost point blank in order to avoid get hurt.
In this example pistol with autofire mod don’t kills all zombies in one turn:
#_#
#Z_Z#
#@#

But with dual wield pistols it can do.
Also with dual wield player can carry two jerrycan in hands. (or something else)

[Slax]

Realism

Good thing this is a game. Strength and dexterity, otherwise you probably won't hit much at all.

[i2amroy]

[quote=“Slax, post:16, topic:1268”]

Realism

Good thing this is a game. Strength and dexterity, otherwise you probably won’t hit much at all.[/quote]
Tough luck. If you didn’t want realism in your games you shouldn’t have picked a game deved by people who enjoy Dwarf Fortress.

[TheRealTenman]

I don’t get it…The only style of dual wielding that is useful is the relaxed pistol ninja.
One hand at a time but switch between hands and targets and keep both arms moving.
The reason it is faster is because you don’t turn or pivot. You turn your head and raise an arm.
If a guy is on your left use your left hand. If a guy is on your right, use your right.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . Z. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.Z . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .@. . . . . . .
. . . .Z . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .Z . . .

Three turns time to kill all four. (assuming all hits and insta kills.)
While it would take four turns in game function. It would take a shorter clock time.

Character is facing nearest Z

0.0) Both arms begin moving
0.3) LH moved to closest Z
0.8) LH is aimed at closest Z
0.9) RH is in basic area of next target
1.0) LH shoots closest Z

1.4) RH aimed to top left Z
1.5) LH is in basic area of next target
1.6) RH shoots top left hand Z

2.0) LH aimed at bottom right Z
2.1) RH is moving towards next target
2.2) LH shoots bottom right Z

2.5) Character twists/pivots to help aim
2.8) RH aimed at last Z
2.9) Character feels badass
3.0) RH shoots last Z

Not radically faster but still better than:
1)Pivot aim shoot.
2)Pivot aim shoot.
3)Pivot aim shoot.
4)Pivot aim shoot.

The only other real world application is cover fire/bullet spam in which case you should use a light machine gun.

Melee is however a completely different thing. Two light weapons, even two pipes, are insanely good for combat.

If you have some muscles (like me) you can easily hold a metal pole/pipe in each hand and move well.
Again…the best application is a relaxed ninja. Smooth movements at all times. Throw in some push kicks and you have a f*** awesome fighting style.

Compare a boxer to a boxer using one hand…
Compare walking to hopping on one leg…

Up to 3 times faster at .8 damage. 2.4 times DPS

[Mrnocamera]

Also with dual wield player can carry two jerrycan in hands. (or something else)

Now I thinking of a person with a red jerrycan and a revolver walking down a street shooting Zeds.

[drake1storm]

In real life, you will almost never see a professional wield two guns. The primary problem is that, unless you are firing a .22, the recoil is going to cause the bullets to fly haphazardly if you try and fire with any sort of speed. Another issue, as has already been mentioned, is the “tunnel vision” effect that occurs when aiming down a sight. If you have ever tried it, you will notice that, almost immediately, everything starts to blur except for the sights and the target (at least it was immediate with me and crossbows). You simply cannot aim them both at the same time and expect to have it still on target by the time they are ready to fire.

However, dual wielding melee is another story. Depending on the style involved, dual weapon wielding can be used for 2 general fields of attack (each with a corresponding type of weapon used).

There is the “defense” way of wielding which relies on two average length one handed swords constantly switching between defense and offense. This requires keen concentration and focus as you have to carefully watch both blades so as to both hit your target and not damage your other blade while defending. This is the style you see more in TV, and it generally is about equivalent to a slightly more effective “shield and sword” tactic.

Then there is the swifter way of wielding. This involves using two smaller blades, or one long and one short, to maintain momentum and keep a constant flurry of attacks going. This requires a lot of endurance, flexibility, and situational awareness to be pulled off effectively as you should NOT try and stop a sword when doing this. You should instead attempt to merely deflect the blade and use that to keep the momentum of attacks going. This style is seen on TV most often as the “berserker” wielding two small axes, but, unlike in tv, wearing any but the heaviest of armor will not impede you very much.

In short, if you were to put this in the game, dual wielding guns would need an absolutely soul soulcrushing reduction in accuracy and be limited to guns with smaller rounds. For melee, they would need either high intelligence and strength to dual wield defensively, or high perception and dexterity to wield swiftly. If they don’t have high enough skills, they are very likely to flub everything and/or cut themselves to shreds on accident (pick up two sticks and start swinging. Chances are good you will leave with bruises. Imagine that with blades.).