SickleCider wrote: »

NoTimeToWait wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Can't see much of modification.

A horse should look like this when "sprinting" (well, gallopping):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6U8ipxSRAUA

The space covered by one cycle is really large, watch how far forward the front legs of the horses go and how far back the hind legs...

if you try to implement an accurate galloping animation for a horse, it would look not that great from the 3rd person camera at the back. Yeah, animators have it rough, since real life animations are not always completely applicable

I'm with the others, this needs expansion.

1. Bad in what way?
2. What about contrary examples?

Also, do you have personal experience with this? That one I'm just curious about.

twev wrote: »

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

twev wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

twev wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Can't see much of modification.

A horse should look like this when "sprinting" (well, gallopping):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6U8ipxSRAUA

The space covered by one cycle is really large, watch how far forward the front legs of the horses go and how far back the hind legs...

Probably more appropriate would be the way a draft horse runs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYDBi_YlAZw

Draft horses are super bulky, and not built for speed.
A faster horse doesn't 'just' increase the speed of it's gait, it increases the length of it's stride.
Horses in ESO just speed up the beat of the gait, without increasing the length of stride.
They ought to stretch out the stride more, without doubling the gait.

exactly. The type of horse you would take into battle or on an adventure that could have deadly encounters. The type of horse that can carry six sets of armor.

But we don't take horses into battle.
We abandon horses immediately upon entering combat.
Knights rode palfreys when not actually jousting, and jousting was basically the only mounted combat.
A joust was a single charge in a ceremonial charge during a 'game'.
Knights rarely rode horses in combat because the bulk of armour made them unable to protect the horse, and a wounded horse wound drop a knight on his back in the field, leaving him mostly unable to get back up to fight or defend himself.
Palfreys were gentler traveling horses.

"A Knight and His Horse(s) When a knight needed a faster horse that could change direction quickly in battle, he rode a courser. For everyday use, he rode a smaller, all-purpose rouncey."

Cavalry rode light fast horses IN combat, and all the rest of the time they were mounted for travel.

Mounted combat is basically a shock Cavalry attack where the riders blaze through a line of defenders.
A plodding draft horse would leave you in the midst of defenders attacking the knight from all sides while he could only slowly defend one directed attack at a time, again, leaving the horse unprotected.

The first thing you did to a mounted knight was incapacitate the horse, leaving the knight on foot at best, and with one leg trapped under the incapacitated horse at worst.

Reference The Battle of Agincourt, where the English wiped out the French mounted cavalry and knights with basically a peasant army of archers.

What is the source of your information regarding jousting being the only mounted combat? Because this is untrue. Lances were used in combat, on horseback. In fact, there were lances specifically made for warfare, and lances which were made for jousting.

Methods of fighting against mounted knights are discussed in books of the time, which have been preserved and can still be followed today by those who study history by actually training to do the things knights did in combat.

For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MM6abbGll0s

ModernHistory TV, as well as many other well-informed youtube channels, frequently discuss mounted combat during the medieval period, as well as the training involved to prepare a horse for combat. While there were indeed complications involved with mounted combat, it happened, and it was not just ceremonial jousting.

Even the famous Bayeux tapestry, which is a historical record of warfare in Normandy and England, depicts men in mounted combat.

You're totally correct, I went off the rails using an in-congruent sentence from an incomplete thought.
I totally messed up the description.

As I said in another thread - corrections keep misinformation in check, Thanks for reading what I wrote more accurately than I did, and knowing where I went wrong.
An awesome for you.

But it needs to be expanded, that once the lance was broken, or lost in combat, the knight was left to close quarters combat on horse, which was difficult at best when fighting foot soldier with ranged weapons or pikes, as well as hordes of ordinary foot soldiers attacking from multiple directions.
Thats how the crusaders were decimated over time during the crusades.

The original rules of Chivalry expected knights to fight knights and anyone else they felt like attacking, but it was 'unthinkable' in their code that peasants and foot soldiers would be allowed to attack 'their betters', the nobles on horse.
It was generally considered to be illegal in 'civilized warfare' for non-nobles to attack nobles equipped as knights for a good bit of european history.
When the rules were broken - the knights were at a disadvantage.

Until gunpowder became used against attacking knights and later cavalry- tactics like 20-foot long pikes were used to break cavalry charges by knights by impaling horses, at which point the knights became lumbering combatants on foot.
Once a knight was on the ground - he was overpowered by masses, and generally overwhelmed.
The Swiss had few armoured knights, but they did exceedingly well against attacking knights using echelons of 20-foot pikes by pikemen using the pikes to take down the horses.

As I partially said earlier - cavalry charges were then used to shock with a frontal assault that would ride fast through an enemy line using speed over distance that knights couldn't match, (as well as flanking attacks to take the enemy from the sides and/or rear using speed) when pikes weren't used by defenders.
Especially true when flanking or attacking from the rear, when they were able to attack faster than the defenders were able to respond.
Heavily armoured knights were slower, and their horses carrying the weight had less stamina in reserve to accomplish the speed over distance.

And the tapestries were commissioned by the rich guys, who were generally nobles and in command of the knights, so it's little wonder they would glorify the noble's knights.
Not many common foot soldiers commissioned tapestries, and nobles had little need or use of glorifying the common foot soldier peasants besting knights.
The peasants were rarely recorded as being instrumental, since they had no station in life .

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hi All, just wanted to chime in on this. There was a change to the speed of mount animations in relation to the movement speed of the mount. Specifically, we have capped mount animation speeds at higher mount movement speeds, creating a smoother animation experience. Important to note, mount movement speed is not been impacted here. Just the animation speed itself.

We will add this note for launch day patch notes.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hi All, just wanted to chime in on this. There was a change to the speed of mount animations in relation to the movement speed of the mount. Specifically, we have capped mount animation speeds at higher mount movement speeds, creating a smoother animation experience. Important to note, mount movement speed is not been impacted here. Just the animation speed itself.

We will add this note for launch day patch notes.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Credible_Joe wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hi All, just wanted to chime in on this. There was a change to the speed of mount animations in relation to the movement speed of the mount. Specifically, we have capped mount animation speeds at higher mount movement speeds, creating a smoother animation experience. Important to note, mount movement speed is not been impacted here. Just the animation speed itself.

We will add this note for launch day patch notes.

Will heavyweights still have the awkward slow motion gallop if their minimum movement speed is too high? Or is the walk cycle enforced for walking vs. galloping?

That's a good question. We'll pass this along and see if we can get an answer.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hi All, just wanted to chime in on this. There was a change to the speed of mount animations in relation to the movement speed of the mount. Specifically, we have capped mount animation speeds at higher mount movement speeds, creating a smoother animation experience. Important to note, mount movement speed is not been impacted here. Just the animation speed itself.

We will add this note for launch day patch notes.