Problems

[Joca Amsterdam]

Maybe the bigger problem is that light cav/archers/inf lose to every heavy version of themselfes. There is literally no reason to take any light version when you can take a heavy one who can do all the things that the light version can do but with better armor. The only situation to take light inf is when you go mass spam in captain where you win just by bigger numbers.

Light troops need more dmg/speed or smth else to make them viable. The worst is for sure light cav...

 

[AVRC]

I agree with @KSHMR that it's difficult to get the MMR system to work when there's only a few people looking, without dramatically raising wait times (which will just lower population anyway). Limiting party queuing to duo or 6v6 seems like a good middleground until the population improves.

Part of the problem of the party system is that MnB is often about the weak link rather the strongest - a team with 5-6 solid players is going to win 9/10 vs a team with 4 great players and 2 noobs as the latter are free kills, whilst the solid players are survivable. It's difficult to balance around.

As an aside, have you considered removing the player number message during queuing? I don't feel like it gives a very representative view e.g. there can be several skirmish matches going, but only 2 people queuing, so people assume the game is dead and leave. Maybe an estimated wait time instead?

Yes, the queuing player number is already changed, I agree that it is VERY misleading and is a lose-lose situation even when the system is working properly. We changed it to Average Wait Time like other games but it will arrive with a near-future patch as it is bundled with another feature.

 

[AVRC]

Maybe the bigger problem is that light cav/archers/inf lose to every heavy version of themselfes. There is literally no reason to take any light version when you can take a heavy one who can do all the things that the light version can do but with better armor. The only situation to take light inf is when you go mass spam in captain where you win just by bigger numbers.

Light troops need more dmg/speed or smth else to make them viable. The worst is for sure light cav...

I agree, we are already testing out some interesting changes to the game mode to remedy this for Skirmish.

As we gather the analytics and the feedback for the new patch from the Captain Mode players we are shaping up the Captain Mode balance changes.

 

[KSHMR]

1. You are literally saying you acknowledge that there is another class which increases your chance of winning an engagement in a competitive game but you actively refuse to pick it and them complain that you are losing the engagement. If you don't like switching your class depending on the in game situation maybe you should stick with Siege or TDM. You are also validating the fact that different classes have weaknesses and strengths depending on the situation so it seems to me that everything is working as it should.
2. .
3. Yes, the more people in a stack the higher the calculated group MMR used for matching. We are adjusting the game and adding new MP features to increase the player base.
4. Not yet.

As a developer you are telling me to just go play TDM and Siege because I don't want to play classes that are META at this moment. I am here on the forums because I want to share my feedback and you're telling me to play another gamemode.. Isn't the whole point of being on forums together that we improve the game so that most of us will get an enjoyable experience?

Also, like Aprikosenmann just said, Cavalry beats Infantry and Archers beat Infantry so according to your logic this means: don't take inf.

I am heavily disappointed in you AVRC and with this attitude I doubt this game will reach a desired state. That is, without the help of the modding community.

On top of that, by telling people to bug off to Siege or TDM because they don't find some aspects of Skirmish enjoyable, you might scare them off altogether.. This is already happening by the way.

 

[Joca Amsterdam]

As a developer you are telling me to just go play TDM and Siege because I don't want to play classes that are META at this moment. I am here on the forums because I want to share my feedback and you're telling me to play another gamemode.. Isn't the whole point of being on forums together that we improve the game so that most of us will get an enjoyable experience?

Also, like Aprikosenmann just said, Cavalry beats Infantry and Archers beat Infantry so according to your logic this means: don't take inf.

I am heavily disappointed in you AVRC and with this attitude I doubt this game will reach a desired state. That is, without the help of the modding community.

On top of that, by telling people to bug off to Siege or TDM because they don't find some aspects of Skirmish enjoyable, you might scare them off altogether.. This is already happening by the way.

cav beats inf that dont have spears or other long 2handed weapon. Even if the cav has the longest lance you can still kill him with a short spear.

 

[Ikea Knight]

cav beats inf that dont have spears or other long 2handed weapon. Even if the cav has the longest lance you can still kill him with a short spear.

In 1 vs 1 surely.
But cav doesn't usually fights in duels.
They look for a busy target ideally with it's back turned.

Maybe the bigger problem is that light cav/archers/inf lose to every heavy version of themselfes. There is literally no reason to take any light version when you can take a heavy one who can do all the things that the light version can do but with better armor. The only situation to take light inf is when you go mass spam in captain where you win just by bigger numbers.

Light troops need more dmg/speed or smth else to make them viable. The worst is for sure light cav...

Some light troops are really good. At least in Skirmish. The trippel spawn on the Battanian Wildling gives it an edge over the Oathsworn.

I also think that light cav is actually in a good place.
You can probably have about the same damage potential it's just way more risky.
In teamfights I think both units are fine. Light cav really struggles against archers though, since the horse can be killed by two good hits.
But that's why light cav is cheaper, I guess.

 

[Aprikosenmann]

Yes, the queuing player number is already changed, I agree that it is VERY misleading and is a lose-lose situation even when the system is working properly. We changed it to Average Wait Time like other games but it will arrive with a near-future patch as it is bundled with another feature.

From reading the past messages it seems like the matchmaking is getting built with care. Good to hear!

One thing is clear: It is better the more people queue alone or in smaller stacks.
-less wait time for fair teams
-fairer teams in general
-more accurate rank for the individuals
-less frustration

But should we forbid 3,4,5 stacking?
This will hurt casual players that just want to play in small groups. And those dont even destroy the matchmaking. It gets really problematic when 4 veterans group together. Or 2 strong cav group together.
One possibility would be to restrict the stack size more and more the higher the elo gets.

One deciding factor wether the ranked mode will be successfull or not will be badges.
A "750 ranked win" badge will motivate players to group up with strong groups to stomp lobbys, really contraproductive. It also promotes leaving loosing games since they seem to be a waste of time.
A "150 ranked played solo" badge will not only bring people to queue up alone more often, which will make it easer for the matchmaking to create fair team really quick, it will also make people stay inside loosing games more often.
A "150 ranked played in groups" badge could be additional to the second one.

DONT UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF BADGES! I imagine that such a badge could have a bigger effect on leaver than punishment.

 

[KSHMR]

From reading the past messages it seems like the matchmaking is getting built with care. Good to hear!

One thing is clear: It is better the more people queue alone or in smaller stacks.
-less wait time for fair teams
-fairer teams in general
-more accurate rank for the individuals
-less frustration

But should we forbid 3,4,5 stacking?
This will hurt casual players that just want to play in small groups. And those dont even destroy the matchmaking. It gets really problematic when 4 veterans group together. Or 2 strong cav group together.
One possibility would be to restrict the stack size more and more the higher the elo gets.

One deciding factor wether the ranked mode will be successfull or not will be badges.
A "750 ranked win" badge will motivate players to group up with strong groups to stomp lobbys, really contraproductive. It also promotes leaving loosing games since they seem to be a waste of time.
A "150 ranked played solo" badge will not only bring people to queue up alone more often, which will make it easer for the matchmaking to create fair team really quick, it will also make people stay inside loosing games more often.
A "150 ranked played in groups" badge could be additional to the second one.

DONT UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF BADGES! I imagine that such a badge could have a bigger effect on leaver than punishment.

This is why the increase of MMR for a collective group should be relative to their base values, meaning that the MMR of a group of people that are not that good is significantly lower than of a stack of people that are all high MMR players.

 

[Aprikosenmann]

This is why the increase of MMR for a collective group should be relative to their base values, meaning that the MMR of a group of people that are not that good is significantly lower than of a stack of people that are all high MMR players.

That only works in theory because it will require more and more players to make up for it or it increases the wait time. If DM builds a 5 stack their MMR will be so high that you would have to wait 5 hours to find 6 worthy opponents. If they queue alone you can have a fair lobby within 2 minutes.

 

[Joca Amsterdam]

In 1 vs 1 surely.
But cav doesn't usually fights in duels.
They look for a busy target ideally with it's back turned.




Some light troops are really good. At least in Skirmish. The trippel spawn on the Battanian Wildling gives it an edge over the Oathsworn.

I also think that light cav is actually in a good place.
You can probably have about the same damage potential it's just way more risky.
In teamfights I think both units are fine. Light cav really struggles against archers though, since the horse can be killed by two good hits.
But that's why light cav is cheaper, I guess.

haha light cav in a good place? light cav is probably the most useless unit in this game. Low armor for rider and low armor for horse. Most dont have shields. There is literally no reason to take beduins when you can take mamluke. In captain there is no cost, only bigger numbers.

Maybe in skmirsh the lack of armor you can replace with skill but in captain where you are only 1 out of 10 in your group, no. AI is AI, and it will get killed easily with less armor.

Light troops need more speed or dmg to make the viable. You cant add them numbers because that will maybe balance out captain but not skrmish.

 

[Younes]

Cav beat Inf
Archer beat Inf
Shock beat Inf

Where skirmisher, where rabble

 

[Einarcf]

Maybe the bigger problem is that light cav/archers/inf lose to every heavy version of themselfes. There is literally no reason to take any light version when you can take a heavy one who can do all the things that the light version can do but with better armor. The only situation to take light inf is when you go mass spam in captain where you win just by bigger numbers.

Light troops need more dmg/speed or smth else to make them viable. The worst is for sure light cav...

Khuzait and Aserai light archer have interesting fast arrow perk (that their heavy version lack). Harder to dodge by enemies and longer shooting range.

Also, don't underestimate the power of slighty better movement speed. That is the power of less armor.

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

Also, like Aprikosenmann just said, Cavalry beats Infantry and Archers beat Infantry so according to your logic this means: don't take inf.

It's true but also a little misleading, by their very nature inf are placing themselves in dangerous positions and are looking to engage in melee fights, or hold areas. That's what they're for. As such they are often going to be in dangerous positions, whereas archers can shoot from a little hideaway spot and cav can choose their fight more freely.

What makes these classes skilled is different (this is why comp players often specialise in just one or two), and it's notable that heavy inf builds are more prevalent than mixed builds even on the more open maps.

 

[Joca Amsterdam]

Khuzait and Aserai light archer have interesting fast arrow perk (that their heavy version lack). Harder to dodge by enemies and longer shooting range.

Also, don't underestimate the power of slighty better movement speed. That is the power of less armor.

Haha lets say steppe bow and khan guards go 1 vs 1 ? in captain and in skrmish. What do you think who would win? Both players have the same amount of skill.

 

[Dextrus]

Haha lets say steppe bow and khan guards go 1 vs 1 ? in captain and in skrmish. What do you think who would win? Both players have the same amount of skill.

I think you shouldn’t argue with skirmish players and get worked up. We have no idea about captain and you have no idea about skirmish. Lets just agree that the modes need separate balancing.

 

[Steelo]

Heavy Infantry is expected to lose to 2Handers, however, they shouldn't be getting killed by archers in most cases, we will make adjustments if required. We are looking into the walking speeds for formations.

Please dont nerf the Archer one more time. You killed the archer and drank from the skull, not again. But still i am glad to current position of archer.
Yes infantry is helpless agains to archers. Because archers running away from them and infantries cannot catch them. its so obvious so what?
I don't know what you will do about heavy infantry, if you will give a guided missile for infantry but dont nerf the archer again.

 

[Dextrus]

It's true but also a little misleading, by their very nature inf are placing themselves in dangerous positions and are looking to engage in melee fights, or hold areas. That's what they're for. As such they are often going to be in dangerous positions, whereas archers can shoot from a little hideaway spot and cav can choose their fight more freely.

What makes these classes skilled is different (this is why comp players often specialise in just one or two), and it's notable that heavy inf builds are more prevalent than mixed builds even on the more open maps.

Well heavy inf still gets picked because you are dead meat if you take lighter inf. Cav one shots you, archers too, and if you get to fight heavy inf one hit will get you so low that any arrow will finish you.

Heavy inf gets nerfed over and over. Since the first beast we have had class limits in order to not play CS GO with 3 cavs running around. But still the devs keep pushing down the inf nerfs down our throats.

 

[Dextrus]

Please dont nerf the Archer one more time. You killed the archer and drank from the skull, not again. But still i am glad to current position of archer.
I don't know what you will do about heavy infantry, if you will give a guided missile for infantry but dont nerf the archer again.
Yes infantry is helpless agains to archers. Because archers running away from them and infantries cannot catch them. its so obvious so what?

Archers do need more nerfs. The only class that can touch them is cav but only when that cav comes from behind unnoticed. A good archer dishes out dmg left and right and he cannot be beaten in a 1v1 if he knows how to block.

So you 2 People to kill the Archer in melee, but to get 2 people close to that one archer, you sacrifice your whole team and even then the archer can just run away.

So pls don’t say archers got nerfed because you need to wait half a second longer to have pin point accuracy.

 

[Joca Amsterdam]

Archers do need more nerfs. The only class that can touch them is cav but only when that cav comes from behind unnoticed. A good archer dishes out dmg left and right and he cannot be beaten in a 1v1 if he knows how to block.

So you 2 People to kill the Archer in melee, but to get 2 people close to that one archer, you sacrifice your whole team and even then the archer can just run away.

So pls don’t say archers got nerfed because you need to wait half a second longer to have pin point accuracy.

captain/skrmish balance

need a different topic for this...

 

[KSHMR]

and he cannot be beaten in a 1v1 if he knows how to block.

So you 2 People to kill the Archer in melee, but to get 2 people close to that one archer, you sacrifice your whole team and even then the archer can just run away.

Precisely so.