Why no underwater combat? : V - Skyrim

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 9:22 am

Doesn't mean a bow won't work in roughly the same fashion.

I think you would have a hard time proving that. Or at least proving the truth of it.

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 8:53 pm

Oh and by the way, Arrows float, they don't sink. just saying.

Depends what's on the end of it. A bodkin point might sink it

I did mention that a crossbow would work better. Rather than just saying "no" could you explain your thoughts behind it?

The reason I thought of a bow was because of the way you fire a bow. Obviously they won't work as good as crossbows underwater, but the principle is still the same. Thinking about it though, the water would have an affect on the wood of the bow and of the arrows.

Neither would work effectively because of too much drag. An arrow moves far and fast in a straight line because of air passing over the fletchings (the feathers, or whatever, at the back end acting as aerodynamic stabilizers). And the water would stretch the bowstring and warp the bow.

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:34 am

Neither weapon would work underwater; there's too much resistance to the limbs of the bow or the crossbow.

Rubber-band powered spear guns work well because the bands merely contract sharply, rather than moving through the water. Also, the "spear" is very streamlined and comparatively heavy.

There would be way too much drag on a bow if you fired it.

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 8:07 pm

Slaughterfish, which are the only reason to fight under water, can be killed from the surface with a bow.

However, underwater melee was in earlier games. It is probably because of the lack of underwater content in this game so far (I am hoping anyway), there was no reason to put it in.

And yet..content can be put underwater -,-

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:39 am

And the water would stretch the bowstring and warp the bow.

This is what I thought, but then people complain about the lack of realism in Skyrim so what would one more bit of nonrealism change?

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 8:20 pm

This is what I thought, but then people complain about the lack of realism in Skyrim so what would one more bit of nonrealism change?

It would just give them something else to complain about. But they would also complain if it worked as it would IRL because "it's a game and they should be able to" so to be honest it's probably better just to leave it out!

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 9:32 am

I don't understand WHY people feel that underwater combat is needed. First of all, the water would slow down all movement, and the fish would be too fast, which would make underwater combat stupid. On top of that, the only enemy you would actually be fighting would be slaughterfish, so the whole feature would be completely unnecessary.

In other words; underwater combat is IMO stupid, unnecessary and would be a waste of money.

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:25 am

Alright i know Bethesda is adding mounted combat to TES V: Skyrim this is gonna be awesome!!! but i am wondering why is there no underwater combat!!! D: i would love to see underwater combat released with mounted combat! :biggrin:

that would make Skyrim so much better, i hate those dumb fish attacking me when I'm looking for stuff or just swimming :/

There's no underwater combat because the Companions killed all of the Weresharks in their ranks.

What did you expect from them? It was sushi night at Jorvaskr, and they were out of salmon meat...

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:09 pm

It would just give them something else to complain about. But they would also complain if it worked as it would IRL because "it's a game and they should be able to" so to be honest it's probably better just to leave it out!

Don't get me wrong, I don't think you should be able to fire a bow underwater in Skyrim. In fact, I think underwater combat shouldn't go any further than daggers and unarmed.

I don't understand WHY people feel that underwater combat is needed. First of all, the water would slow down all movement, and the fish would be too fast, which would make underwater combat stupid. On top of that, the only enemy you would actually be fighting would be slaughterfish, so the whole feature would be completely unnecessary.

A fish is only fast because it's adapted to being in water. Surely if an Argonian can breath underwater, then it has adapeted to being in the water. If they've adapted to being in the water, it makes sense that they would be able to fight underwater, as well. Even so, knives can be used underwater quite effectively; both as tools and weapons.

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:31 am

Underwater combat ... no. There is only one enemy under water and while they are annoying since you have to lure them to the shore to kill them, it's not that big of a deal.

Also you would really need spears for underwater combat, which of course we don't have.

I do wish there were more enemies in the water and then this would be needed. Who wouldn't want to see a pod of Narwhals in the frozen seas?

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 6:42 pm

A fish is only fast because it's adapted to being in water. Surely if an Argonian can breath underwater, then it has adapeted to being in the water. If they've adapted to being in the water, it makes sense that they would be able to fight underwater, as well. Even so, knives can be used underwater quite effectively; both as tools and weapons.

Sure, an argonian with a knife is understandable. An argonian can breath under water and a knife would work well, sure. On the other hand, if a player was to use a two-handed sword as a human or elf? Surely, that wouldn't make sense at all.

I could accept underwater combat if it was added to knives only, but absolutely not to bigger weapons.

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 11:39 am

Hand to hand is more like pushing than really hitting. It is hard to land a punch underwater that would do more damage to the enemy than how much it wears you out. Underwater combat can only be done effectively with a dagger or short sword that can stab or spear to poke. I think a speargun would be kind of stretching it for inclusion to the game. But you can forget bows, axes, hammers, greatswords and most shortswords for that matter.

That's what he said. A DLC is coming up anyway. *hint* *hint* *nudge* *nudge*

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:42 pm

Sure, an argonian with a knife is understandable. An argonian can breath under water and a knife would work well, sure. On the other hand, if a player was to use a two-handed sword as a human or elf? Surely, that wouldn't make sense at all.

I could accept underwater combat if it was added to knives only, but absolutely not to bigger weapons.

Totally agree with you. I'd even go so far as to say that Argonians should be able to move faster, and therefore cause more damage than a human (both unarmed and weilding a knife or two) because of their reptilian features. Their scales would likely provide less resistance against the water than the mammalian races, not to mention some Argonians have broader, flatter tails.

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:06 pm

A fish is only fast because it's adapted to being in water. Surely if an Argonian can breath underwater, then it has adapeted to being in the water. If they've adapted to being in the water, it makes sense that they would be able to fight underwater, as well. Even so, knives can be used underwater quite effectively; both as tools and weapons.

This is just some incredibly disjointed logic.

That thing kids say comes to mind.. if a [censored] is a dog, and a dog is nature and nature is beautiful, then being called a [censored] is a compliment.. right?

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:31 pm

Y'know, guys, spears and crossbows might work underwater... :whistle:

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:36 pm

Who would want to risk drowning while trying to stab a slaughterfish or bandit underwater? Is it really worth it when you can just swim to shore and fight or escape? And realistically, the bodies of water in Skyrim are likely very cold and proper RP dictates that you would want to stay in the water as short as possible! That's my logic.

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:55 pm

This is just some incredibly disjointed logic.

That thing kids say comes to mind.. if a [censored] is a dog, and a dog is nature and nature is beautiful, then being called a [censored] is a compliment.. right?

Actually, that comment was based on what I know about real life reptiles.

Who would want to risk drowning while trying to stab a slaughterfish or bandit underwater? Is it really worth it when you can just swim to shore and fight or escape? And realistically, the bodies of water in Skyrim are likely very cold and proper RP dictates that you would want to stay in the water as short as possible! That's my logic.

Obviously this does make things a little more dificult when it comes to underwater combat. For example, Argonians may be better suited to water than most races, but they're likely cold blooded, so they wouldn't be able to spend as long in the water as one of the human races, and lesser still than Khajiit.

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:57 pm

Actually, that comment was based on what I know about real life reptiles.

What you do and do not know is irrelevant. You made the leap that being adapted for life in water in one aspect means you'll be equally adapted for other activities underwater. There is no logic in that, you blindly jumped from one to the next.

By using that exact same logic, I could say that, as a crocodile or sea turtle show adaptions for living in water, that they must also be able to breathe under water.. right? Or that, seeing as jellyfish and sea crabs can respire under water, they must be able to move fast in water.. right?

Besides, if you're saying that was based on what you 'know' about real life reptiles.. then I am very suspicious of what you think you know..

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:35 am

It wouldn't be realistic shooting arrows underwater like oblivion and morrowind haha

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:47 pm

If there were no underwater enemies then fair enough, no need to add in underwater combat, HOWEVER, there are slaughterfish as well as enemies somtimes falling into deep water. The slaughterfish have been a royal pain in the ass for me, I'm a pure warrior and as such I don't carry a bow with me at all. Which means I have to spend ages trying to tempt the slaughterfish back to shore just to kill it. I don't see how you can release a game with underwater enemies (granted they may be few) without underwater combat.

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:21 pm

What you do and do not know is irrelevant. You made the leap that being adapted for life in water in one aspect means you'll be equally adapted for other activities underwater. There is no logic in that, you blindly jumped from one to the next.

By using that exact same logic, I could say that, as a crocodile or sea turtle show adaptions for living in water, that they must also be able to breathe under water.. right? Or that, seeing as jellyfish and sea crabs can respire under water, they must be able to move fast in water.. right?

Besides, if you're saying that was based on what you 'know' about real life reptiles.. then I am very suspicious of what you think you know..

Actually, no. I took into account the Argonians hairless scales reducing resistance against the water and some Argonians broad flat tails and likened them to known species of reptiles. Just because I didn't mention those in that comment, doesn't mean I didn't think about them; and I know I mentioned them in another comment.

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:01 pm

Not usually, their pathing is all messed up when they get under water. And, there are some places that once you get in the water, there is no way out unless your lucky with the controller, which NPCs never are. Until those NPCs get their feet under them, there is no combat.

It might be nice to be able to use a Shock spell on water logged enemies. The old toaster in the bathtub effect.

I actually tried that, and was quite sadface when it didn't work. Thought I was being really clever too... "[I]well if flames work with oil...[I/]"

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:29 pm

I actually tried that, and was quite sadface when it didn't work. Thought I was being really clever too... "[I]well if flames work with oil...[I/]"

I tried igniting oil with a shock spell and had the same reaction when it didn't work. Would be rather handy if it worked on both water and oil.

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:04 pm

I tried igniting oil with a shock spell and had the same reaction when it didn't work. Would be rather handy if it worked on both water and oil.

Have you ultimate facedesked after failing to ignite an oil pool with a fire spell and totally given away your position? The Rincewind of Tamriel, thats me... :facepalm:

» Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:05 pm

Have you ultimate facedesked after failing to ignite an oil pool with a fire spell and totally given away your position? The Rincewind of Tamriel, thats me... :facepalm:

A few times because I've failed to notice the lamp above it :banghead: