Lancers - Observations, Conclusions and Solutions

[Kator Viridian]

Ok I actually feel like I have to explain that "balance" does not mean "exactly equal parts" as you seem to think it does. It means a balance. Don't make me look up the definition in a dictionary, please *facedesk*

That would be the root of your ridiculous balance arguments. You're using a definition that no one else uses.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/balance
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/balance

Thats what i tend to use as "Balance" but I guess inequality must be balance too ... so I guess lancers are already balanced and its a matter of opinion inbalancement. *face desk*

I think atleast I've proved in English that Balance means exactly equal both sides ... which in any game ... is near impossible unless 2 characters are exactly the same ... therefore you'll never really have any kind of balance with the classes ... but to try and stem the tide of lancer spam there is a 20% volume on one side of the battlefield for "Cavalry" not just lancers.

The balance issue that seems to arise is that of power, the lancer as itself is balanced and unbalanced in terms of opinions and experiance of player.

And then we're back to where we start again after going off on a tangent of definition of words.

The thing i'm looking at mainly is ... will people continue playing if nothing is done ... which usually tends to be the majority of the time. People will continue playing but if you nurf the lancer too much or too less your back to opinions again on wether people like it or not ... and in about 2-3 months time we'll be having the opposite of this same argument ... jsut like we had a repeat of this argument around the start of prussia 1.

Can we not just end the thread and have done with it?

 

[KillerMongoose]

It keeps the lancer suggestion spam out of the suggestion thread.

 

[Kator Viridian]

It keeps the lancer suggestion spam out of the suggestion thread.

Is it still happening?

 

[KillerMongoose]

This thread thins it out but one occasionally slips through lol, threads like these tend to keep the spam out of the suggestion thread, making room for new and innovative suggestions. Rare as they might be lol

 

[Kator Viridian]

This thread thins it out but one occasionally slips through lol, threads like these tend to keep the spam out of the suggestion thread, making room for new and innovative suggestions. Rare as they might be lol

Aye when moons are blue.

 

[KillerMongoose]

Indeed, and when pigs fly...erm...without the aid of a catapult that is.

 

[Hekko]

Balance does not mean that this equality has to be made up of exactly the same components. So while you are right, an exact balance is impossible in practice, it does not mean that one should not strive for balance especially between classes that compete very fiercly for spots.

 

[Kator Viridian]

Balance does not mean that this equality has to be made up of exactly the same components. So while you are right, an exact balance is impossible in practice, it does not mean that one should not strive for balance especially between classes that compete very fiercly for spots.

The other way you could do it is splitting out the lancers from other cavalry.

That way you can lower the percentage of lancers on the field ... but that dosn't seem very fair at all.

 

[Hekko]

That could also work, but it fixes the symptom rather than the underlying problem, and I doubt the lancers would be happy.

 

[Kator Viridian]

That could also work, but it fixes the symptom rather than the underlying problem, and I doubt the lancers would be happy.

Well its like trying to cure a poison from a puffer fish ... your dead ... is about the bottom line.

 

[JeanChristophe]

Killermongooses suggestion (with the stuck lance when couching) is the only good one. Also you should make a poll on how many people there are that want to nerf lancers and how many dont . I think you would see that alot of people want to keep them as they are now. Though I really wouldnt care if lances get nerfed sword is much easier to kill with anyways(spamspamspam people not knowing how to block etc).

 

[The Magnificent Bastard]

I'm sorry for not letting this go Kator, I'm being dreadfully dull doing it. I'll be quick and simple. Also since you're suing the physical definition I'll explain it as such.

Balance only implies equal amount on either side if the matter on both sides is the same. "Fun" (please not the quotation marks, you know what I mean) and Realism are not equal entities, therefore balance can be attained by inequal amounts on either side.

I hope that explains what I really feel should come naturally to any English speaker. That balance is in the figurative sense, as is the case in game design, does not mean you need exactly the same of everything on all sides.

Sorry for being so uninspired, but I do appear to have a glass of Jägermeister in my hand.

 

[TADER_BROS_Ltd.]

Couch = Force of horse only

whereas,

Stab = Force of horse + Force of arm

therefore,

Stab Force > Couch Force
 

O Evan, this really sums up the logic and arguments of the nerf lancer-QQ crowd. You twist facts and figures to suit your purposes at will, while denying solid evidence that refutes your arguments as inadmissible and irrelevant because its existence is inconvenient to your whining and stands in the way of you getting what you want. As I have said all along I believe you simply have a problem dodging and dealing with couched lances and the class in general. It isn't overpowered, just like musketeers aren't overpowered. In both cases only players who use them to effect against players who are unable to counter are overpowered. This is not a problem for the mod and community, but simply the individual players, so please stop trying to drag this into a public spectacle of debate ruled by your counter-intuitive logic and personal inadequacies. Your game experience, does not necessarily = the game experience of the majority of players.


That goes for all players proposing changes about any aspect of this mod. Everyone does of course have the right to voice suggestions and discuss in this forum, it is after all what a forum is for. But before you do, take a look at yourself and your motives, and ask yourself if you are trying to better the mod and community experience, or if you are demonizing parts of the mod/players/regiments and imposing your viewpoints, opinions, and beliefs on others.

On the topic of having lances do less damage when couched than stabbed I would like to say that while the speed certainly is greater for a stab the force will be smaller, because, the force that can be applied will be limited by how strong an arm the lancer has since the arm will sooner or later will have to give way to the fact that the horse is stronger than the man holding the lance.

The idea of the couch is that you try to put as much force of the horse into the stab, rather than the rider, and the horse will almost always be a source of more force.

Hekko has the right of it, for all of our differences of opinion on these subjects, he has made a number of thoughtful points and fair concessions. The idea that the couch should be less damage or inferior to a stab is nothing short of ludicrous, and is fitting with neither historical or gameplay considerations. If you cannot inherently understand why bracing a lance with the mass and velocity of a moving horse and rider is more powerful than a one handed poke, there is nothing more I can say to enlighten you on the subject.

Killermongooses suggestion (with the stuck lance when couching) is the only good one. Also you should make a poll on how many people there are that want to nerf lancers and how many dont . I think you would see that alot of people want to keep them as they are now. Though I really wouldnt care if lances get nerfed sword is much easier to kill with anyways(spamspamspam people not knowing how to block etc).

This suggestion is neither original, fair or good. It has been put forth many times, and at its core is only a thinly veiled lash out that would eliminate the usefulness of a class. Rather than serving the purpose of regulating and reigning the usefulness of the weapon, this would simply create a set of rules where lancers would avoid the breakage by selecting a certain attack or speed. To implement this based on historical or realism reasons overlooks a host of other aspects which would first have to be implemented to attain the desired level. Firearms malfunctioning due to jamming or misfiring powder, not to mention environmental considerations like rain or sand, the brittle serpentines and trigger mechanisms on guns breaking after being used to block in a melee, and the overall possibility of and weapon or item breaking in use are just a few of these aspects to consider.

It keeps the lancer suggestion spam out of the suggestion thread.

I'm afraid this entire thread is little more than spam. 28 pages and counting of bullheaded discussion and pretentious "evidence" compiling, with a spattering of "lol nub", "cry moar" and "zomg OP" comments throughout. After all this we are left right where we started. Some vocal proponents of a nerf and some vocal critics of a nerf. Dare I say that the majority of the community cares not enough to read all this garbage, and lies somewhere in the middle of the spectrum within the "don't care", "fine-as-it-is", and "maybe a slight change, ie horse or class limit" ballpark.

In summary, most will see the length and content of this thread and react something like this:

Spoiler

 

[Kator Viridian]

I'm sorry for not letting this go Kator, I'm being dreadfully dull doing it. I'll be quick and simple. Also since you're suing the physical definition I'll explain it as such.

Balance only implies equal amount on either side if the matter on both sides is the same. "Fun" (please not the quotation marks, you know what I mean) and Realism are not equal entities, therefore balance can be attained by inequal amounts on either side.

I hope that explains what I really feel should come naturally to any English speaker. That balance is in the figurative sense, as is the case in game design, does not mean you need exactly the same of everything on all sides.

Sorry for being so uninspired, but I do appear to have a glass of Jägermeister in my hand.

Your missing one important thing though ... Apparently opinion is fact

You know i've just been stringing this along as long as possible? ... right? only because its more entertaining than going round in circles on Lancers and ultimately ending in speculation it might be nurfed ... or it might not.

And seen as fun is "Fun" shouldn't balance be "Balance"? Best way to mess with the mind is when your drunk

Well i'll be cracking open the hobgoblin tomorrow ... well today seen as its 1:30 and me, ProjectAngel and AgentGB have decided its time for some "Star wars IV: A New Hope"

Oh Yes Merry Christmas everyone ... well atleast those that don't hate it

P.s. Anyone who plays SWTOR remember to shout "ITSHA TRAP!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjMNNpIksaI

 

[Oldplayer]

holy moly so many pages

we should start a new argument thread!

 

[Evanovic]

Spoiler

Couch = Force of horse only

whereas,

Stab = Force of horse + Force of arm

therefore,

Stab Force > Couch Force
 

O Evan, this really sums up the logic and arguments of the nerf lancer-QQ crowd. You twist facts and figures to suit your purposes at will, while denying solid evidence that refutes your arguments as inadmissible and irrelevant because its existence is inconvenient to your whining and stands in the way of you getting what you want. As I have said all along I believe you simply have a problem dodging and dealing with couched lances and the class in general. It isn't overpowered, just like musketeers aren't overpowered. In both cases only players who use them to effect against players who are unable to counter are overpowered. This is not a problem for the mod and community, but simply the individual players, so please stop trying to drag this into a public spectacle of debate ruled by your counter-intuitive logic and personal inadequacies. Your game experience, does not necessarily = the game experience of the majority of players.

That goes for all players proposing changes about any aspect of this mod. Everyone does of course have the right to voice suggestions and discuss in this forum, it is after all what a forum is for. But before you do, take a look at yourself and your motives, and ask yourself if you are trying to better the mod and community experience, or if you are demonizing parts of the mod/players/regiments and imposing your viewpoints, opinions, and beliefs on others.

The logic of it makes a lot of sense and you have not explicitly explained why it might not. Where is the counter-intuitiveness? Do you not know physics? or do you not have the capacity to explain your opinion?

Momentum = mass x velocity

Couch momentum = mass of lance x velocity of horse

Stab momentum = mass of lance x (velocity of horse + velocity of arm)

Unequivocally,
Stab momentum > Couch momentum
therefore, in reality a stab would do more damage and wedge deeper into a man than a couch.

*Extra information*

Spoiler

This is just a little expansion on the two variables of momentum, so that people understand that I have considered the more complex aspects of the equation. Luckily any differences in the following areas are negligible as the couch and stab positioning is very similar. Nevertheless, for reference:

It is actually a little more complex than the 'mass of the lance' only. One does have to take into account the mass of the arm/shoulder and perhaps some of the mass of the horse, as the rider is attatched to the horse, but in both Couch and Stab situations the mass levels are similar enough to not have a bearing on the result difference. In both situations it is mainly the arm and the upper body of the rider that acts as the mass behind the lance, and in both situations the lance is pretty much the same distance above the horse and no more 'connected' to the horses mass than the other. So in other words, when I say 'mass of lance' I have just simplified the value for easier reading.

The Velocity part of things is a little more complex too, but equally negatable from the equation. Velocity is a vector quantity and therefore relies on direction as well as magnitude. It is not of concern though because the direction of the lance in both couch and stab situations is very similar, and both are similarly limited in possible attack angles. So once again for simplicity these issues have not been expressed in the main conclusive equations, as they are not of influence or great concern.

How can you deny this? let alone not bother to explain yourself. Where is your 'solid evidence' that's going to counter my points? You throw around a lot of adjectives to describe how apparently inadequate my ideas are, but you don't give any substance to the counter-argument yourself.

After all those words you have yet prove why the logic behind the Couch conclusions is wrong.

There has been no obvious attempt on my part (or most others) to demean players who use lancers. I have approached the case of lancers in a methodical and logical fashion, aiming to avoid personal clashes and petty insulting. I am not here because of any 'personal inadequacies' that I have when facing lancers. I get annoyed when killed by a lancer, but I also get annoyed when I'm shot, ganged upon in bayonet melee and slashed by sword-wielding cavalry. However, you don't see me making threads about those other things, so evidently my motive is not to complain simply for the sake of it. It's just that with lancers I observed some systematic imbalances that I believed I could express in a logical and proof-driven manner.

I'm trying to be objective here. Whereas I find you're the one bringing bitterness into the thread and attempting to portray my conclusions as malicious condemnations of the lancer community, which they blatantly are not. I feel that you're the one who's 'twisting' the situation.

On the topic of having lances do less damage when couched than stabbed I would like to say that while the speed certainly is greater for a stab the force will be smaller, because, the force that can be applied will be limited by how strong an arm the lancer has since the arm will sooner or later will have to give way to the fact that the horse is stronger than the man holding the lance.

The idea of the couch is that you try to put as much force of the horse into the stab, rather than the rider, and the horse will almost always be a source of more force.

Hekko, I would direct you to the top of this post where I believe I prove correctly that a Stab would theoretically do more damage than a Couch.

I am not clear what you mean by 'the arm will give way' and why the force would be smaller.

I'm afraid this entire thread is little more than spam. 28 pages and counting of bullheaded discussion and pretentious "evidence" compiling, with a spattering of "lol nub", "cry moar" and "zomg OP" comments throughout. After all this we are left right where we started. Some vocal proponents of a nerf and some vocal critics of a nerf. Dare I say that the majority of the community cares not enough to read all this garbage, and lies somewhere in the middle of the spectrum within the "don't care", "fine-as-it-is", and "maybe a slight change, ie horse or class limit" ballpark.

The evidence is not pretentious. Efforts have been made to ground it and process it with objectivity. This is the sort of manner by which game-makers and game-balancers should and probably do approach the issues. Whether or not a nerf is achieved by this thread we can at least say it progressed. It's successfully stayed on topic for the last 28 pages and developed into some good debate, better than the fate of most threads in such forum communities. I would call this thread more of a truimph than a failure and I'm not trying to take personal glory for it, but rather congratulate all of you who have participated in this debate (even those whom I disagree with).

Evan

 

[Kator Viridian]

Couch momentum = mass of lance x velocity of horse

Stab momentum = mass of lance x (velocity of horse + velocity of arm)

Forgot to note that the couch actually uses the power and weight of the horse (The horse and rider become one in motion with each other) ... the stab will not use the weight of the horse as your arm cannot take the tension.

The lances mass is so insignificant to couching its not even a matter so really:

Couch momentum = (Mass of horse x velocity of horse) (- or /) Strength of man

Stab Momentum = (Velocity of horse + Velocity of arm) (- or /) strength of arm

I would think that would make more sense. Considering a couch uses the whole body and the horse, where as a stab/lunge is based mainly on the strength of your arm/wrist.

...

I would think thats something similar ish to what hekko was meaning.

It's successfully stayed on topic for the last 28 pages and developed into some good debate, better than the fate of most threads in such forum communities. I would call this thread more of a truimph than a failure and I'm not trying to take personal glory for it, but rather congratulate all of you who have participated in this debate (even those whom I disagree with).

I'd say the first 10 now its just opinion based.

And i'd say failure tbh ... it really won't/hasn't changed a single thing.

I don't know why you'd think you don't want to take glory for it ... you wouldn't be taking glory for it anyway, if you did the sign would say "Congratulations the Admins and Devs have done nothing towards your unsuccessful thoughts and opinions".

 

[Evanovic]

Couch momentum = mass of lance x velocity of horse

Stab momentum = mass of lance x (velocity of horse + velocity of arm)

Forgot to note that the couch actually uses the power and weight of the horse (The horse and rider become one in motion with each other) ... the stab will not use the weight of the horse as your arm cannot take the tension.

The lances mass is so insignificant to couching its not even a matter so really:

Couch momentum = (Mass of horse x velocity of horse) (- or /) Strength of man

Stab Momentum = (Velocity of horse + Velocity of arm) (- or /) strength of arm

I would think that would make more sense. Considering a couch uses the whole body and the horse, where as a stab/lunge is based mainly on the strength of your arm/wrist.

I made an edit to my post when I considered this, but I don't believe that the situations of stab and couch have significantly different required 'strength' levels for it to bear down on the result.

With a stab the tension is indeed less sustainable because of the less 'connection' between the lance's mass and the horse's mass. The added impact of the horse survives via this route: arm -> shoulder -> human body -> saddle.

With the couch there is a more direct connection to the horse via the route: shoulder -> human body -> saddle. So yes, the couch has more 'mass' in its momentum and can take the tension better.

However, I felt that this difference was not enough to factor in and to have an influence on the current conclusion that: Stab momentum > Couch momentum, as at full extension the arm is pretty sturdy and we're considering the impact against an infantryman here not, say, a wall, so the rider's arm is not going to break. It should hold strong, just as a couch would.

Remember also that we are talking about 19th century lances here, that are significantly lighter than late medieval ones. I can perhaps see there being more prevelance of this 'strength' factor with heavy medieval ones.

Another thing: I commend you Kator for doing what Tader did not do: you're challenging the arguments put forward with your own evidences and proofs. This makes for good debate and keeps civil discussion going.

Evan

 

[TADER_BROS_Ltd.]

The logic of it makes a lot of sense and you have not explicitly explained why it might not. Where is the counter-intuitiveness? Do you not know physics? or do you not have the capacity to explain your opinion?

Momentum = mass x velocity

Couch momentum = mass of lance x velocity of horse

Stab momentum = mass of lance x (velocity of horse + velocity of arm)

Unequivocally,
Stab momentum > Couch momentum
therefore, in reality a stab would do more damage and wedge deeper into a man than a couch....

Spoiler

Its really nothing short of laughable that you are even attempting to further argue this. Thank you for proving my point. I stopped reading when you denied being pretentious while throwing around the biggest words you could muster. My previous post and the .gif especially really does say it all.

 

[Jyppa]

Sup, I do science.

Velocity =/= Momentum.
Momentum => Big Hurt.
Velocity =/> Big Hurt.
Angles matter.

That is all, happy holidays.