People seem to think of sword work as 'block and attack' where both sides are 'trading' roles.
When in reality it might be better to think of it as both sides being offensive and diametrically opposed so that each is moving towards a common goal of breaking past the other's guard by changing 'leverage'.
Defensive moves are then only to be considered a form to alter position, reach and height plus blade angles of subsequent attack against an opponent who hold an advanatage in the current form.
According to the Masters, you shouldn't 'manually' separate the two into definitive elements because the switch between attack and defend will never happen (in your mind) quickly enough.
No matter how many buttons and mode options you have.
This is especially so when fighting with weapons as deliberately sharp as a Katana (and hence a saber, more specific massed weapon 'difficulties' in the SW universe) because you _cannot_ afford to meet edge to edge in more than the most oblique fashion.
Hence you 'bat' the weapons and fight head high and dual handed with the objective being purely to push through the (lateral) clash-of-flats and score a head tap.
Now if you switch to some of the killing arts (anything with a jutsu after it) you start to see more 'tennis' combinations where the blades come lower and there is switching between forehand blocks to bring the fight to a given range and then side and angled 'backhand' cuts to finish (and pass thru) the engagement **quickly**, drawing or sweeping and occasionally stabbing before switching back to what can only be described as a 'hack' to inflict deep slashing wounds (the kind that split torsos, very nasty).
You will also see MUCH more emphasis on 'testing' moves that are actually disabling kills (and multiple weapons to assist in this including shaken and small onblade knives/darts) to wrist/forearm, thighs/groin and knees, temples, eyes, and even ankles before lethal attacks at the neck or midbody.
Yet more 'unsportsmanlike' moves that you will NEVER seen in SW but which are in fact preferred because the targets are hard to cover and easily damaged beyond 'will to fight' overcome.
Comparing Shinai which sting with Bokkan which crush and Katana which butcher is silly yet you can bet (with all the safety and insurance requirements for actors and next-sequel to consider) that there is not much 'playing the edges' of the weapon envelope.
THIS is why, even when you see them 'really go at it' in EP.6 and EP.1 it is always to a basic center, slow and braced, contact point, never around the guard or against the limbs (yeah yeah, ESB) bearing up the dance/sword movements.
With this in mind, how realistic do you want it?
Go to full realism and the first mistake will be the last, even for a Jedi. There will be no grunted 'Ouuuwwwhh!' and short term stiffening because this meter long blow torch weapon will inflict shock and destructive damage like you can't believe.
And again, if it follows reality, people will be VERY tentative in the way they close, batting at the very edges of the envelope because they instinctively KNOW that there is going to be a much higher risk of an enemy attacking whatever is easiest, quickest, and least risky-to-reach.
Where this extends to manual attack-defense with such a firey horror, you will find yourself 'burnt once but never shamed again'.
And this too will effect the drama people seem to want in MP/online.
I would also like to point out that one of the biggest gripes of JK was that you couldn't close with blaster equipped targets, whether running or walking, without eating energy fire damage in-process (centering crosshairs in external view doesn't happen and is of questionable utility even in 1st person, IMO).
Add to this the limited perspective viewing and indeed /awareness/ (walls block sightline) and it was blatantly obvious in 'Batter Up!!, TPM The Game' that if you want a manual defensive blocking capability it had bloody well better be against the dumbest of 'up front' (no ambush) threats firing across a limited azimuth spread and very slowly or in limited (co-timed, shared deflect) bursts with low numbers of total shooters.
I would instead rather have the smartest possible Imps and other 'gun users' and 360` global awareness of super quick blocking, even as I move around the fight arena.
IMO, this means 'full auto' (to literally reflect the weapons rate of fire they are used against) and _perfect_ projectile-blocking, while you bring yourself close enough to 'get even'.
Either through standard running or an 'enter fight' translative movement (leap, or Jedi Jerk Speed ala the EP.1 scene with the Destroyers).
I like the idea of fighting with the Force Depletion blockign effect and would say that if you move to a linear graph (longer total 'strength bar') and most importantly _faster recharge_ it could definitely be made to work.
But I still say that if you want to fight another blade wielder, you must think of defensive work purely as 'tilting' the enemies blade for subsequent reattack in the same move.
That means auto-D(efense)-to-manual-O(ffense) with all the 'variety' (difficulty) of breaking past an enemies defensive web being inherent to analyzing the pattern of his bladework matching an attack style to it and then 'adding a flourish at the end' (manual final attack) to score the kill through the created hole.
This works well with my Kata system because it allows multiple cuts of a given type to both 'discover' that weakness and deplete the enemies blocking Force Strength too fast to regenerate.
While giving you the SKILL option of a quick-kill interrupt of the form with a modification blow based on your insight.
While Properly Programmed Katas, also mean you are hitting so skillfully that you never lose the 'flow' of combat dominance and suffer a leverage reversal sufficient to let the initiative go back to the other guy's attacks.
One last thing to consider: A Master will beat a Novice.
_Regardless_ (say 95% of the time).
Though admittedly simplifiedm if you think of it in terms of Martial Arts Belts the MtoA ratio is anything with 2 or more belts between them.
The (relative) expert will simply know more moves, be more insightful and waste less energy in his own motions (Force, whatever) to be altogether more slippery yet 'directed' in his total combat system.
With a bladed weapon, this almost always means death.
In the SW case, you might think of even Sabre fighting as being more like blocking blaster bolts, simple and easy and automatic for anyone you have a Kata (blade hit or form style) advantage over such that you CAN HAVE that 'emphasis on the Preferred Weapon of the Named Game' (sabre vs. sabre) with quick kills allowing you to 'also fight the next guy' instead of treating each encounter with a Jedi as a singular boss-monster (end level) of exclusive concentration.
How many of you could beat Jerec with a force of 5 Imps using heavy weapons to help him?
I thought so.
How many of you could beat Yun with 10 Imps using conventional blasters?
Probably rather more though it would still be viciously difficult.
The difference being the speed and 'style' (smoothness/ease) with which you dispatch your _primary threat_ to turn and deal with the secondary ones on a coaxis-deflect line.
If you design a level well, you will find sufficient numbers of 'less than or equal to you' sabre opponents to BECOME a master while there is nothing shameful in refusing a combat you can't win.
Nor a reason to insert an opponent who beats the crap out of you until you (dice toss learning curve) randomly succeed and move on.
'Difficult Encounters' might then be _combinations_ of sabre users (Quigon and Obiwan) or shooters and sabres (Imps+Jedi) or whatever and for each difficult encounter you would gain another kata or another programming space in the kata line or even simply 'more Force' (slower drain) so that when you finally came up against that 'Master Class' opponent you had the skills to make it a battle royalle of equal skill sets.
One last thing: I obviously use my computer for more than just Gameboy Leisure. I _do not_ want to 'mash' ANY key on my board.
If I need more defense (blocking movements) let me switch the cruise control to that mode. If I want more offense then let me increase weight that the auto-AI gives that ability as a function of Force-Use. Simply, elegantly, one-time press.
Pretty Fair Explanation Of Fencing and Accompaniment Weapons Development http://users.aol.com/maist/fence-1.htm http://users.aol.com/maist/fence-2.htm