Galdred about that helmet from The Last Duel, there was some "making of" feature that addressed that. Adam Driver and Matt Damon did a lot of their own stunts. Ridley Scott wanted everyone to see that Driver and Damon were actually in there. And he especially didn't want anyone thinking "Wait. Which guy is which?" Sometimes in order to make something work on screen, you have to sacrifice realism.
Other movies have done a lot worse with the realism of their fights. I was going to start listing them,* but really, any swordfight on screen for the last 20+ years has been less realistic than The Last Duel. I think Scott did a pretty good job of staying realistic and making only minimal sacrifices to make it cinematic.
That is true, the fight itself is pretty good. It suffers from the same issues as the ones in the King, though, in that both characters wear heavy armor, but still try to cut through each other. At least, they target the head a lot more, which is great. There is a precendence for weird helms. The challenged party could choose the offensive and defensive equipment of the duel, so you could very well settle for some weird half helmet, but you'd need to have a good in universe reason to do so, like maybe having taken lung damage and having a worse time than your opponent breathing with a helmet on, or specializing in thrust to the left of the face.
One historical precedent was the duel between Jarnac and La Châtaignerie in France. Jarnac knew his opponent was much stronger than him, so he requested the duel to happen with a rigid arm protection that would make it impossible to move the left arm at all, so that his opponent would not be able to grapple. His opponent thought about declining, but he was supposed to be the better duelist, so he had to accept the challenge, and died.
As for how people can be so immersed in fantasy settings and still be ignorant of real armored fighting, that's because fantasy settings don't actually teach anything about armored fighting. And unless you're specifically creating a gritty, realistic, low-fantasy world, then the realism of your fights doesn't matter.
I have a friend who has been trying to start writing his great fantasy novel for decades. And all he does is research. (He often shares videos from the same creators you linked above.) He asked his circle of friends once about how we think the cross-section of a sword would differ if it had to cut dragon scales. And I told him "It doesn't matter! No one will care but you!" Focus on character development and storytelling techniques. Make a good story and no one will care about the cross-section of the blade. No one will care if an arrow from a longbow can penetrate armor at 100 paces. Those details will only matter if they are in service to the story, and then instead of making the story bend to realism, you should bend realism to fit the story.
Actually, a good part of what I disliked with Game of Thrones were the things that would obviously make zero sense within the universe premises. I am ok with Valyrian steel going through regular metal like butter, but deploying siege engine forward is a big no (even though the French did just that at Formigny to force the English to advance).
Anyway, my goal is not to make a historical game, but I'd rather have the laws of the universe be the same as ours, with the addition of magic. On top of that, it makes magic more formidable for me if you start without it, and see how it makes a lot of things easier with it (which was something awesome in X-COM), hence why I'd rather have armor do its job. I also am firmly in the school that prefers to have the gameplay mechanics reflect the settings, rather than designing them first, then try to make the theme fit (ie, the Ameritrash vs Euro boardgame design schools).
As for my own research, it was a subject I was always interested in, and most of my research time is spent trying to hit opponents with a longsword, or a sword and a shield, so it also brings side benefits.
* I actually kind of do want to discuss movie sword fights though. I think a couple duels from Game of Thrones were good. A lot of the Lord of the Rings fights were fun, but a lot extended into the realm of silly. Maybe that's a topic worthy of its own thread.
The fights in AGoT range from pretty good, to anime level wtf (especially in Dorne, or with Arya), but several of them were pretty good, though. GRR Martins overvalue being nimble because no armor, though, but being able to attack without risking a lethal counter attack is a huge advantage, but the fights vary so widly that it would require its own thread indeed.
The ones in LoTR were also mostly great,. I just found that the camera was way too quick during mass battles to follow the action.
Also, some other cool medieval fights:
They went a bit overboard with the visor cam, and they also have these big overswing that would accomplish nothing, but they have half swording, wresting, and stunning blows to the face.
Or, this anime, which is totally bonkers, but has cool medieval fighting.
In the case of this animated series, I'd say the medieval battles are the only good part, but it is weird to have a random anime do better than any of the movies ever done about the period.
I think having a realistic world really enhances fiction, and in our case, given that combat is the main element of the game, I'd rather have it follow sensible rules. That said, it is not a duel simulator, so some things will indeed be abstracted.
You absolutely could differentiate between two knights. How? Coat of arms. You can find one for Jean de Carrouges and another for Jacques Le Gris (whether they are historical or made-up is a separate matter). Another thing - colours. Knights wearing a surcoat and their horeses wearing a caparison are there for a reason: to help identify a knight by showing their coat of arms and colours. For helmets (aside from different shapes of these) you had things such as plumes, cloaks and crests.
Considering we're talking about jousting, all of that applies here. Which is why I am not buying the argument that "they gave them weird half-face helmets, because there was no other way to tell them apart". Bullshit. They just went low-effort, because they didn't want to make proper jousting costumes. What a missed chance to make something actually colourful and interesting...
As you say, different colours, different helm styles. Even something stupid like just having an open face helm with no visor (or a visor that's sometimes flipped up) would've been better than that gay half face helm thing. Who came up with that?
The duel sequence was still pretty bad ass anyway though.
Yes, I agree, having very different helms, and coats of arms would have been enough. Also, at one point, one of the knights loses his helmet, which also happen in battle, especially after both fighters end up close.
Now, regarding combat in Zodiac Legion, it won't change that much, because armor already provides great protection, but:
Expose, which is the debuff you get after trying to move away from an opponent, will also be a status effect you can inflict on a feint.
I'll add "tripping enemy" attack (that will simulate grappling or any similar technique), that will be very difficult to execute without support, unless the opponent is exposed, and make the enemy prone/stuned.
Reaching 0 stamina will also make you prone/stuned, and each attack will cause stamina loss, with the impact weapons causing more.
That shouldn't require much change in the code.
choice.
