(Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

[Bloodstone]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

The approach taken will, in my view, impact the game. If you take the realistic approach, then don't complain when all the warriors gravitate to the very few weapons that are the best choices for free efficiency. If three players want their characters to be competiive in combat, none of them will be taking Dagger as their primary weapon choice. They probably all buy "WF: Common Melee Weapons", and they'll probably all carry a dagger or two so they can take advantage of its concealability, small size in tight quarters, etc. when those traits are advantageous. But in typical action adventure combat, the daggers will stay sheathed and they will use those more efficient no points paid weapons. And the characters will, presumably, be differentiated by factors other than choice of weapons.

 

If you take the cinematic approach, then choice of weapons is no longer about efficiency, but about flavour. It is pure special effects, and the choice of weapon will be a differentiating factor only from that perspective, having no more game impact than choice of hair colour or speaking with an accent. The characters will likely wield a wide array of different weapons, absent some other reason to gravitate to a specific choice (eg. if most magical weapons are swords, your warrior may want to focus in on swords).

 

Tesuji's game will feature warriors with many different weapon preferences being equally effective. Their combat styles will be differentiated by how they spend their points - dagger guy may well choose to focus on a style encouraging multiple attacks and/or sneak attacks, while Axe Guy may be built as a berserker whose focus is sheer carnage and one shot damage. But they will gain their advantages and drawbacks from how they choose to spend their points, not which free gear they choose to select.

 

NuSoard's games will feature players designing characters around the weapon choice that they find most efficient. You won't see spear wielders because bows and swords are clearly superior choices. Spears will be relegated to primitive societies the heroes might run across in their explorations. Daggers will be a backup weapon, or a weapon preferred by sneaky rogues, not a main weapon for a face to face warrior.

 

This only becomes a problem if NuSoard is hoping for a group of characters that select a wide array of weapons, because the players will be discouraged from doing so, as only a few weapons are tactically sound choices.

 

Either approach works. The key is to recognize the impact the choice will have on the game, and select the option that will fit with the desired game.

 

Repped!

 

Though I will point out, not everyone has an equal vision of what a weapon can "realistically" do. That can make balancing things difficult sometimes.

 

For example spears, halberds and other pole arms frequently get the shaft (rimshot!) in fantasy settings, despite how vitally important and effective they were in actual historical combat.

[tesuji]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

Repped!

 

Though I will point out, not everyone has an equal vision of what a weapon can "realistically" do. That can make balancing things difficult sometimes.

 

For example spears, halberds and other pole arms frequently get the shaft (rimshot!) in fantasy settings, despite how vitally important and effective they were in actual historical combat.

 

absolutely. In some versions of DND i loved the spear. it had set vs charge, it had throwing, it had length and did reasonable damage. Some were even one handed iirc so you could have the shield.

 

Where they still got shafted was the "705 of all magic weapons are longswords" kind of thing that was in play in some earlier editions.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

 

NuSoard's games will feature players designing characters around the weapon choice that they find most efficient. You won't see spear wielders because bows and swords are clearly superior choices. Spears will be relegated to primitive societies the heroes might run across in their explorations. Daggers will be a backup weapon, or a weapon preferred by sneaky rogues, not a main weapon for a face to face warrior.

 

Actually, in my personal experience, this is incorrect. Only a percentage of players will chose their weapon based on its combat efficiency. These specific types of players are the ones who are likely to delve very deeply into the mechanics of the game system at hand and take all aspects of the weapon into consideration before deciding which one to use. In my experience, most roleplayers do not fall into this camp. I do agree that a high percentage of HERO players are like this...the nature of the HERO System attracts that type of gamer...but the average roleplayer doesn't fall into this category. The vast majority of rolepayers aren't actually interested in the mechanics of the game at hand and simply want their characters to perform to their expectations. In pretty much all of the games I've GM'd, players almost universally chose their weapon based on personal preference and character concept rather than mechanical efficiency. In fact, in my current group, not a single character is using anything close to being "the best weapon". I have a Pirate Captain who wields dual shortswords and a crossbow, an Elven craftsman who wields no weapons whatsoever, but is half Earth Elemental with superstrength, a half-dragon thief who wields shortswords and a spear, and a Mentalist mage who wields only magic with no weapons training at all. All of these characters are heavily concept based with no one choosing weapons based on combat efficiency.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

Though I will point out, not everyone has an equal vision of what a weapon can "realistically" do. That can make balancing things difficult sometimes.

 

For example spears, halberds and other pole arms frequently get the shaft (rimshot!) in fantasy settings, despite how vitally important and effective they were in actual historical combat.

 

The problem with pole arms is that they were best used in armies than in single combat. Most historical combat wasn't one on one or small group skirmishes. Plus, few fantasy characters in the source material wield glaives and halberds, of course.

[dmjalund]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

The problem with pole arms is that they were best used in armies than in single combat. Most historical combat wasn't one on one or small group skirmishes. Plus' date=' few fantasy characters in the source material wield glaives and halberds, of course.[/quote']

One of the big problems with these long weapons it it is too easy for a skilled warrior to get inside the range of these weapons

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

How about using end for weapons? Usually heavier weapons do more damage, and I think that they should tired you out quicker. Now of course there should be some exceptions, like magical, or exceptionally crafted weapons. Oh and depending on how you feel, weapon length can also add to the end cost. For 5th which uses stretching, I envision of having no end to power it means that the weapon is too heavy to pick up, not that the shaft just disapears.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

How about using end for weapons? Usually heavier weapons do more damage' date=' and I think that they should tired you out quicker. Now of course there should be some exceptions, like magical, or exceptionally crafted weapons. Oh and depending on how you feel, weapon length can also add to the end cost. For 5th which uses stretching, I envision of having no end to power it means that the weapon is too heavy to pick up, not that the shaft just disapears.[/quote']

 

Indeed, this is the case. The End cost for weapons is based upon their STR Minimums. A weapon with a STR Minimum of 17 would cost at least 2 Endurance per attack (or 3 End if using 1 End per 5 STR rule), which would tire out the wielder twice as fast as a weapon with a STR Min of 13 or less. This is assuming that no additional STR is used to increase the damage class of the weapon. (this is how Skill Levels and Martial Arts can be superior to using extra STR to enhance the damage of a weapon)

[Doc Democracy]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

I am trying to think how I would implement Tesuji's scheme of things.

 

So. First go - Core Game Rule options

 

Damage

1. Any character who has access to a weapon can deal 1.5D6 killing attacks.

2. Any character who has access to a weapon can do 1/2D6 killing attack and +1/2D6 killing per relevant skill level with said weapon

 

Weapons

1. Each weapon will have something that adds to the effectiveness of the weapon but give it some unique flavour but all weapons have the same bonus structure

2. Each weapon class (light, medium, heavy) will have something that adds to the effectiveness of the weapon with lightest weapons adding least

3. Each weapon has several unique features that can be accessed depending on the number of relevant skill levels

 

This is an entirely different way to go about weapons in HERO but I think a good one for High Fantasy and some other genres...

 

I like options 2 and 3 above. This would mean that my thief, if he was carrying daggers and had several skill levels could decide to apply some of the levels to increased damage and some to accessing stuff like range and multiple attacks while the fighter with the axe and the same number of skill levels might be applying them all into added damage.

 

The trick would be setting out all of the options and how they might interact value wise...

 

 

Interesting concept...

 

 

Doc

 

PS: and a worthwhile post to mark 2500 posts to boot!

[Bodkins Odds]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

Indeed' date=' this is the case. The End cost for weapons is based upon their STR Minimums. A weapon with a STR Minimum of 17 would cost [i']at least[/i] 2 Endurance per attack (or 3 End if using 1 End per 5 STR rule), which would tire out the wielder twice as fast as a weapon with a STR Min of 13 or less. This is assuming that no additional STR is used to increase the damage class of the weapon. (this is how Skill Levels and Martial Arts can be superior to using extra STR to enhance the damage of a weapon)

 

Must spread rep around before giving it to NuSoardGraphite again. Which is odd, because I don't remember giving you rep the first time.

[Markdoc]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

My approach is pretty simple and consistent.

 

1. I want weapons to reflect (roughly) their historical usage. If you are tackling heavily armoured opponents, I want people to prefer large or AP weapons, in general. However (as noted in another ongoing thread) such weapon are not generally considered appropriate townwear. When Sir Kumfrance the Round rides off to slay the dragon, he should take a lance, a sword or an axe - not a singlestick, knife or sharpened spoon, IMO. Thus, ordinary weapons weapons have different damage ratings encouraging (generally) their historical usage. So two handed sword guy does more damage, right out of the box, but has to contend with the fact that in many cases he won't necessarily have his two-handed sword with him. He'd be foolish to specialize too much. Dagger guy does less damage, but can usually count on having a dagger most of the time - and thus can afford to spend more points on it (such as CSLs for his weapon).

 

Result #1: the characters are balanced but distinct: they each have advantages in some settings, disadvantages in others.

 

2. I want to allow "extraordinary skill". After you have been playing for a while, the basic "free" weapons start to become a hindrance. You start to max out your damage (I'm keeping the 2x base damage cap - and in 6E that's suggested as standard for anything with STR Min). In this case I allow the purchase of straight up powers. A 2d6 HKA can be defined as "two handed sword" or "great skill with daggers" but it's a) not free equipment since it reflects "character prowess" and so must be bought and costs the same regardless of special effect. Again, dagger guy and two handed sword guy are balanced: they are simply buying a power and they pay the same cost.

 

This seems to cover the bases for me and my players, is balanced, simple and consistent.

 

cheers, Mark

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

Here is a random thought, well two. First, why not make bigger/heavier weapons have negative OCVs? Iirc only spears just had this, but I could see other weapons having this too. Just read a Conan story

The Hour of the Dragon, well in one chapter, he is diguised as the executioner, and the axe is described as not being efficent for combat. To me that sounds like a great example for a -1 OCV. (Of course in Conan's hand, it still was a lethal weapon.)

 

Second, (now this would be more complicated,) how about assigning a negative dex to bigger weapons? Say a two handed sword has a -2 dex, and a dagger has 0 dex modifier. Assuming both have the same dex, say 10 example well dagger guy goes first because 2h sowrd guy now has an effective dex of 8 using the weapon.

 

Well the is some food for thought.

[mayapuppies]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

Here is a random thought, well two. First, why not make bigger/heavier weapons have negative OCVs? Iirc only spears just had this, but I could see other weapons having this too. Just read a Conan story

The Hour of the Dragon, well in one chapter, he is diguised as the executioner, and the axe is described as not being efficent for combat. To me that sounds like a great example for a -1 OCV. (Of course in Conan's hand, it still was a lethal weapon.)

 

Second, (now this would be more complicated,) how about assigning a negative dex to bigger weapons? Say a two handed sword has a -2 dex, and a dagger has 0 dex modifier. Assuming both have the same dex, say 10 example well dagger guy goes first because 2h sowrd guy now has an effective dex of 8 using the weapon.

 

Well the is some food for thought.

I do this with some of my weapons to represent how slow they are. For example:

 

Bipennis

Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 2d6, Reduced Endurance (0 END) (45 Active Points); STR Min 12, Side Effects, Side Effect occurs automatically whenever Power is used (-1 to DEX Only To Determine Who Attacks First In A Phase), Real Weapon, One-And-A-Half-Handed

Treat 1's rolled for damage as 2's

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

Here is a random thought, well two. First, why not make bigger/heavier weapons have negative OCVs? Iirc only spears just had this, but I could see other weapons having this too. Just read a Conan story

The Hour of the Dragon, well in one chapter, he is diguised as the executioner, and the axe is described as not being efficent for combat. To me that sounds like a great example for a -1 OCV. (Of course in Conan's hand, it still was a lethal weapon.)

 

Second, (now this would be more complicated,) how about assigning a negative dex to bigger weapons? Say a two handed sword has a -2 dex, and a dagger has 0 dex modifier. Assuming both have the same dex, say 10 example well dagger guy goes first because 2h sowrd guy now has an effective dex of 8 using the weapon.

 

Well the is some food for thought.

 

Yes, I have considered this as well. I avoid giving OCV penalties for all but the most unwieldy of weapons (like flails), however the DEX penalty is something I have experimented with in the past and I've found that it works fairly well in practice as long as the DEX penal is kept to a reasonable amount.

 

I would allow characters to remove the DEX penalty removing a 1pt penalty per 5pts of STR that they exceed the STR minimum by.

[Lucius]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

 

Second, (now this would be more complicated,) how about assigning a negative dex to bigger weapons? Say a two handed sword has a -2 dex, and a dagger has 0 dex modifier. Assuming both have the same dex, say 10 example well dagger guy goes first because 2h sowrd guy now has an effective dex of 8 using the weapon.

 

Well the is some food for thought.

 

Not necessarily the most nutritious food for thought. Here is some more nourishing fare.

 

A dagger, as normally defined, is a pretty short weapon. In fact, few weapons are shorter.

 

An axe or sword is almost certainly longer than a dagger.

 

Assuming similar size and build, the person with the longer weapon has a longer reach.

 

In fact, leaving aside the question of two warriors facing off, a single warrior has a longer reach with a battle ax then he does with a dagger.

 

So: One man has a knife, another has a longer arm (meaning weapon, but if you want to get technical it could be limb...)

One or the other or both wants to kill the other. It's kill or be killed, and they're closing to melee.

 

Who do you think gets first strike?

Or to put it another way, who gets in reach of the other's weapon first?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Or is the palindromedary going to have to spell it out for you?

[Thanee]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

Here is a random thought, well two. First, why not make bigger/heavier weapons have negative OCVs? Iirc only spears just had this, but I could see other weapons having this too. Just read a Conan story

The Hour of the Dragon, well in one chapter, he is diguised as the executioner, and the axe is described as not being efficent for combat. To me that sounds like a great example for a -1 OCV. (Of course in Conan's hand, it still was a lethal weapon.)

 

Second, (now this would be more complicated,) how about assigning a negative dex to bigger weapons? Say a two handed sword has a -2 dex, and a dagger has 0 dex modifier. Assuming both have the same dex, say 10 example well dagger guy goes first because 2h sowrd guy now has an effective dex of 8 using the weapon.

 

Well the is some food for thought.

 

I had thought about adding a DCV column to equipment, to also figure in defensive qualities, but I'm not sure if that is a good idea, yet.

 

As for the lower OCV, that's what I did with my axe/sword writeup on page 1.

 

Bye

Thanee

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

 

In fact, leaving aside the question of two warriors facing off, a single warrior has a longer reach with a battle ax then he does with a dagger.

 

So: One man has a knife, another has a longer arm (meaning weapon, but if you want to get technical it could be limb...)

One or the other or both wants to kill the other. It's kill or be killed, and they're closing to melee.

 

Who do you think gets first strike?

Or to put it another way, who gets in reach of the other's weapon first?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Or is the palindromedary going to have to spell it out for you?

 

Are you also considering that to use an axe effectively you have to swing your weapon in an arc? That means the axe head is going to take longer to reach its target than say a spear which you use in a thrusting manner, which of course is a straight line. And don't forget too that if the axe misses, to switch the momentum of the weapon to either strike again or to block is that much harder.

 

So the question is for the GM to answer is how much detail do I want to add to the game. The great thing about hero is that the GM can keep it simple or complex as he or she likes. And the GM can add any or no biases they want.

 

And feel free to spell it out to me. I am interested from where you are coming from.

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

I do this with some of my weapons to represent how slow they are. For example:

 

Bipennis

Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 2d6, Reduced Endurance (0 END) (45 Active Points); STR Min 12, Side Effects, Side Effect occurs automatically whenever Power is used (-1 to DEX Only To Determine Who Attacks First In A Phase), Real Weapon, One-And-A-Half-Handed

Treat 1's rolled for damage as 2's

 

I thought I was original with the negative dex, but glad though that other people think like me! And I had to look up bipennis!

[Hierax]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

I thought I was original with the negative dex' date=' but glad though that other people think like me![/quote']

 

Lots of options for Weapon Speeds:

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/76975-Weapon-Speeds-and-Casting-Times

[tesuji]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

Interesting...

 

What i did mechanics-wise was to add a "weapon damage" component to the typical fantasy package deals.

Warriors had more damage base with a broader category of weapons (smaller limitation on cost.) Also had a block of pts set aside for "combat tricks.

Rogues has less base damage and more narrow scope of weapons it applied to. had similar block of points set aside for combat tricks.

mages had even less base damage and smallest group of weapons etc. No pts set aside for combat tricks.

 

Then i had a list of maybe 20ish combat tricks ()as more were invented they were added ranging in cost from 5 cp to 20 cp each. Aimed for most in the 5-10 cp range.

 

No one was required to buy package deals or pre-fabbed tricks but many did for simplicity and at the very least the process served as examples of "what you can do" as well as "what to expect from the bad guys" to some extent. As GM i often designed foes with a quick pick from list approach.

 

 

 

I am trying to think how I would implement Tesuji's scheme of things.

 

So. First go - Core Game Rule options

 

Damage

1. Any character who has access to a weapon can deal 1.5D6 killing attacks.

2. Any character who has access to a weapon can do 1/2D6 killing attack and +1/2D6 killing per relevant skill level with said weapon

 

Weapons

1. Each weapon will have something that adds to the effectiveness of the weapon but give it some unique flavour but all weapons have the same bonus structure

2. Each weapon class (light, medium, heavy) will have something that adds to the effectiveness of the weapon with lightest weapons adding least

3. Each weapon has several unique features that can be accessed depending on the number of relevant skill levels

 

This is an entirely different way to go about weapons in HERO but I think a good one for High Fantasy and some other genres...

 

I like options 2 and 3 above. This would mean that my thief, if he was carrying daggers and had several skill levels could decide to apply some of the levels to increased damage and some to accessing stuff like range and multiple attacks while the fighter with the axe and the same number of skill levels might be applying them all into added damage.

 

The trick would be setting out all of the options and how they might interact value wise...

 

 

Interesting concept...

 

 

Doc

 

PS: and a worthwhile post to mark 2500 posts to boot!

[Doc Democracy]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

What i did mechanics-wise was to add a "weapon damage" component to the typical fantasy package deals.

Warriors had more damage base with a broader category of weapons (smaller limitation on cost.) Also had a block of pts set aside for "combat tricks.

Rogues has less base damage and more narrow scope of weapons it applied to. had similar block of points set aside for combat tricks.

mages had even less base damage and smallest group of weapons etc. No pts set aside for combat tricks.

 

This is an interesting addition to what you normally see in package deals. It is very useful for GMs in putting together NPCs on the fly and, as you say, because they are standardised, the players have a good idea of what they will be facing.

 

Repped for innovation!

 

 

 

Doc

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

Another thing I forget to post is a new category for foci is "skill". We know that there is personal and univeral when designing a focus. But long time back I asked and Mr. Long agreed that it wouldn't cost anyting different for a third skill category. With this, you can design certain weapons that have a better, or diffeent, or extra ability that olny the person.

 

Here is an example of what I'm babbling about. I feel that sai should have a +5 str to disarm in the weapon. By defining it as skill, I state that only people with the wf sai can access this power. So when I use this sai to disarm a samurai (and because i have the WF) I can use the extra str. Say though that I lose one and the samurai picks it up and tries to disarm me (and because he does not have the WF) he cannot use the extra str. Now instead of skill what about subsituting race or class ? (Sorry about the D&D reference.(

[Lucius]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

Are you also considering that to use an axe effectively you have to swing your weapon in an arc? That means the axe head is going to take longer to reach its target than say a spear which you use in a thrusting manner, which of course is a straight line. And don't forget too that if the axe misses, to switch the momentum of the weapon to either strike again or to block is that much harder.

 

So the question is for the GM to answer is how much detail do I want to add to the game. The great thing about hero is that the GM can keep it simple or complex as he or she likes. And the GM can add any or no biases they want.

 

And feel free to spell it out to me. I am interested from where you are coming from.

 

If you have a dagger, and your enemy has an axe, you are going to be inside the swing of that arc before you get close enough to stab.

 

In other words, no, having the shorter weapon doesn't mean you act before someone with a longer weapon - usually it would be the opposite.

 

Now, as you point out, it's not necessarily that simple. It's possible to get incredibly complicated and detailed with melee weapons, to the point where it's beyond fun for anyone not obsessed with the subject - like Dark Champions did with guns and ammunition.

 

Part of what's happening is that we are confounding the questions of "who acts first?" and "who acts faster?" In Hero, those properties are described by DEX and SPD.

Giving a weapon a SPD bonus sounds unbalancing, but perhaps Autofire makes sense for something like a dagger. At any rate, I don't think it makes sense to give a dagger a DEX bonus!

 

To sum up, yes, you're right that decisions must be made as to how much detail to add to the game. But the question is, if you're going to add details, what details do you want?

In my opinion, there are good details and bad details.

 

I see two reasons for adding detail and complexity - properties I'll call realism, and fun.

 

Realistic details are meant to simulate something, in this case melee combat.

Fun details are about creating diversity that is in balance, i.e. giving players interesting options without making some options non-viable or others overly efficient.

 

These two have more in common that is immediately obvious. Consider - every weapon that has seen any kind of extensive use in history, was used because people found it to be effective for their purposes at the time.

I'm not saying culture never plays a role, but the fact that, for example, in every culture with the tech to make them, some form or other of the sword has been the weapon of choice for professional warriors should tell us something about how useful it is. There is something wrong with a system that makes a sword less effective in combat than an ax.

 

Which is not to say that there should be no reason to choose the axe. Historically a Viking with an axe was one who could not afford a sword, so I've read, but I am sure some of them chose the axe because, besides killing, it was useful for breaking down doors or opening locked chests.

 

Someone's already pointed out that pole arms are very effective in a given circumstance - when in a formation of infantry on a battlefied, for mass combat

 

Now, in some cases what justifies a weapon's existance is something that may never matter to an adventurer - if all fighting is in small groups and formation tactics don't matter, maybe there's no reason to carry a halberd. But if any differentiation is made among weapons, that differentiation should make sense - there should always be a sensible answre to the question "why would anyone ever use that?" even if the answer is "it's cheap" or "it's simpler to learn to use."

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Why would anyone take a palindromedary?

[Escafarc]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

I use Resorce Points in my FH game(I haven't got 6E yet so I don't know if anything has change there) So if the players want a 2d6 +1OCV STRMin7 weapon defined as ether an ax or sword it's all good.

 

Time is too valuable to stress the little things.

[counterveil]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

Some really cool ideas here, thanks for the awesome read! Like Escafarc, I tend towards the simplifying spectrum - I used WFRP's concept of a generic "Hand Weapon", "Great Weapon", etc. and then let people tell me what kind of weapon they want it to be, whether that be sword, axe, or mace. There are "special" weapons like spears and lances, but otherwise fairly generic.

 

I also have weapon "options" that characters can add to their weapons if they find a skilled smith, things like "balanced" (+1 OCV), "sharp" (AP), etc. Generally though, I don't let people just willy-nilly add those things to their weapons.

 

I have similar options for ranged weapons as well.

[AnotherSkip]

Re: (Equipment) Axe vs. Sword

 

The problem with pole arms is that they were best used in armies than in single combat. Most historical combat wasn't one on one or small group skirmishes. Plus' date=' few fantasy characters in the source material wield glaives and halberds, of course.[/quote']

 

I've fought a really good spear skirmisher mano a mano in the SCA and man it really, really sucked. Even knowing the "get inside his reach" tactic and trying to perform it did not help at all.