Disccusion about the current position of Infantry

Users who are viewing this thread

-slow down archers

- set friendly fire to 100% and enable bumps on friendly fire. I know that sounds counterproductive but atm cav just doesn't have to worry much about their friendly units. And while teamkills by archers already happen a lot. I guess the risk/reward Ratio is still high enough for archers to try dangerous shots.
You slow down archers even more, they're gonna be useless in captain once again. This is not the way.
 
There also needs to be a change in mindset for a lot of the cav complaints: unless you make throwing completely non-viable, you are always going to be oneshot by pilas, and you are always going to get killed by throwing axes.
yeah on headshots maybe (or pila bodyshots, if you couldn't inifinitely pick them up again), not on you hitting one of your 3 or 4 projectiles on my foot. That's the kind of bs the post I quoted already gave examples for for other class interactions, this ones ours :smile:
 
yeah on headshots maybe (or pila bodyshots, if you couldn't inifinitely pick them up again), not on you hitting one of your 3 or 4 projectiles on my foot. That's the kind of bs the post I quoted already gave examples for for other class interactions, this ones ours :smile:
You say that throwable oneshots should be restricted to headshots? Not dependend on speed bonus? I mean cav also gets to couch oneshot me without hitting my head because of speed bonus which is completely fine.
 
The problem with the leg shots on cav is most of the time the person was aiming for the horse but accidentally deals 50 damage to the rider's leg lol. But my sympathy is limited considering how otherwise survivable they are.
 
You say that throwable oneshots should be restricted to headshots? Not dependend on speed bonus? I mean cav also gets to couch oneshot me without hitting my head because of speed bonus which is completely fine.
if you get 4 axes/javelins/whatever then you don't get to onehit someone with each of those if you only hit their body or their leg IMO. especially not if you can just go and pick them back up infinitely again.

now, before you bring up the couch lance example again, let me just say that I'm very much in favor of them being adjusted further - my suggestions would be to add a cooldown (15, 20 seconds?) and a max duration (3 seconds + the initial animation thingy), as well as slightly reducing horse maneuverability while a lance is couched. I've been in favor of those for ages.

I want the game to be good and enjoyable for everyone, but with the current pace and contents of development I often don't feel like providing large scale suggestions (as it does not seem like the people making the decisions for the game really care about them anyways), so I just point it out when I see things I find to be going in the wrong direction completly, which might make me seem pretty biased. If you want to actually talk about some balance ideas and throw some stuff together to post from a multi-class perspective I'd be happy to, though I still doubt it would have much if any impact :neutral:
 
Last edited:
shoot below or above shields for small ones?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd say shooting above shields without some real height advantage would be OP and shouldn't be a thing.
But shooting feet is not some easy feat, it takes a bit of random moving and it becomes a very difficult thing.
There already is enough forcefeilds around shields. Especially for cav, even in melee vs spears.

-slow down archers

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- set friendly fire to 100% and enable bumps on friendly fire. I know that sounds counterproductive but atm cav just doesn't have to worry much about their friendly units. And while teamkills by archers already happen a lot. I guess the risk/reward Ratio is still high enough for archers to try dangerous shots.

Slowing down heavy archers 1 more bit could help, i'd like to see it, but im not sure.
Friendly fire wise, for competative modes, I 100% agree. There should be exacly 100% friendly fire on EVERYTHING.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Imo the cavalry is not afraid of infantry with spear. Only I have a problem with spear bouncing especially when a cavalryman shortens the distance?
+ infantry is unable to catch up archers.

Infantry will never really be able to catch up with archers, if those archers take measures to kite on time, unless you make archers move like cripples.
Yes Cav only has to dance around inf a little and even worse they can just slown down and pass by a spearman trough the formation no problem (even land a hit on them).

I think the simple solution would be to put a limit on quick acceleration/ quick stopping for cav. Maybe a few second between how often you can do those 2 (individually, and interchangeably). Because as anyone that knows even a bit about spear/cav play it's all about acceleration and manuverbility (and cav has unlimited control in that right now). Seriously again .. Spamming WW SS WW SSS WWS WSWSWWSW is broken and looks rediculous.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slow down archers, reduce archer damage.

If you want to make longbows do the damage of a rabble rock - ok. But then remove ALL forcefield from shields so you can get headshot for 20 dmg trough it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also think relying on throwing weapons as a way to buff inf is a mistake - you're just adding more ranged to a game already frustrating because of non-melee damage and kills.

I totally agree. A slight buff of throwing could be nice, since some are kind of useless now. But definetly not to a point where they can 1tap like before.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And a shield should cover only the areas it physically is

Though since i like to play archer always i like the sound of that. But being able to headshot people trough shield would be ridiculous.
Maybe increase the size of shields while reducing the forcefield would be nice.
But for cav, as i mentioned earlier, there should be no forcefield, they alerady have crazy speed and manuevrbility, and no limit on how big of a shield they can carry.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- troops should become tired and need to draw breath to recover. Otherwise damage and speed penalties should be appropriate.

I think you're asking for trobule :smile:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


And now i'd like to add on top of saying that there should be a limit for cav's quick start/stop (to a point of drifting). Cavs slow moving damage is INSANE. A lance can do 60-90 damage with very slow movement. Couch lance takes about only a second to do full damage with half the speed, and have no cooldown.
( Remember how the ONLY nerf cav ever recieved was couch lance damage reduction .. )

And on top of noting how cav can slow down and just get pass a shieldwall *( WHICH NEEDS FIXING), and even get a 50+ HP dmg hit on them while doing so. I'd like to say that even when you stop a cav with a spear the only thing you can do is poke them once with a spear in the face for about 30 dmg(heavy cav). Now that bit is ok, but if there is a teammate around without a spear that can reach their face, they will do about 10-15 dmg.

Not to mention that a stopped horse vs 1h weapons is basically a tank.

In warband you could hit the rider and a horse in the same swing. I liked that, that made 2h weapons dangerous to cav, especially when stopped.
Now horses act as a second shield, with no downside.


Now, finally, i'd like to say that nerfing every single aspect of cav would be too much.
If it were up to me to implement some changes. I would just go with
1. Put a cooldown on how much a cav can quick start/stop
2. Make couchlance require more speed to activate and do full dmg.
3. Make HUGE shields impossible to wield on a mount
4. Make spears that hit a cav that is moving toward them STOP the cav with a proper/ non-glance hit.

IMO nerfing cav in these ways would improve INF play.


Now when it comes to inf itself.
I think it would be more enjoyable with the cav changes i proposed.
There is only 1 thing i would want considered when it comes to inf.

And those are spears.
Again in warband if you remember. When you had a spear and a shield and somebody facehug you .. Your hits would bounce off them if you tried to do a "quick" attack. But if you held your attack for a moment you would do enough damage to stun their attack.
That made "hoplites" viable.
Now in an inf fight if you have a spear(any other than the very short ones) you are almost useless.
A spearman need to be countering cav. But if that spearman gets facehugged by an infantryman he becomes useless.
I think this is because the starting point of damage with longer spears is too much infront of the player so when someone comes too close the damage is nullified.

And on top of that in warband you could start your attack "in the air" and then move it toward the enemy and do dmg.
Now the problem with that is that that made pikes able to hit over teammates, basically going trough them.
I would definetly not like to see that again.
But i hope there can be a balance so that a spear can be used closerange to a point where it's not useless.

Another thing that makes long spears useless in a inf fight is that it takes way too long to switch weapons after, i think a summer update.
 
Last edited:
Suggestions from the community on how improve the current position of Infantry:

1. Put a cooldown on how much a cav can quick start/stop
2. Make couchlance require more speed to activate and do full dmg.
3. Make HUGE shields impossible to wield on a mount
4. Make spears that hit a cav that is moving toward them STOP the cav with a proper/ non-glance hit.
5. Make spears more useful for facehugging situations
6. Remove 2H weapons from Archers or do something to how they handle 2H's so it's not that OP (discouraging passive playstyle by increasing stuns could also help with this so maybe removing 2H is then not needed..)
7. Slow heavy archers down 1 point (In skirmish, that is.)
8. Do something about Stronger Shield perk (its useless at the moment)
9. Friendly fire on everything, including bumps
10. Increase throwables damage to horses slightly
11. Improving combat by slowing down how fast someone can hit back after just blocking an attack (discouraging passive playstyle)
12. Slow down speed of kicks a little bit more to discourage passive playstyles
13. Make the teamdamage on friendly fire to horses the same as friendly fire does to humans..
14. Make horses less tanky or tweak around with the amount of blunt or other damage.
15. The reason cav is super annoying, is that the meta game right now is staying right in the groupfight and stabbing people while facetanking any damage that's thrown at your horse with standard melee weapons. This is not okay and MUST be looked at. (Suggestion from Rangah in other post, true story though)
 
I think you're asking for trobule
Nah...just wondering, why a fully armed soldier should run around the map at top speed all the 5-10 minutes and swing a polearm like a spinning derwish or spam melee attacks with heavy objects without having consequences. I always hear 'nerf this, nerf that' but what I am talking about is not only unlogical, but could - if used in the game - eliminate some strange behavior.

"But if that spearman gets facehugged by an infantryman he becomes useless." - well this is why you carry a shorter sidearm with you, isn't it? You still should have a shield and a short sword or hatchet. Otherwise, if having a long spear, you should be able to stop INF at spears tip i.e. brace two-handed, point pointy end of stick at charging inf and when he runs into it, he automatically impales himself taking damage. Pikeman-style. The spear troops are described for 'crowd control' - how so, if you can underrun the spears and facehug? Charging a pike formation should be a bad idea unless you have
a) very big shields or
b) are able to knock away the weapons with something like a 2H-sword or
c) have a long polearm yourself
 
Last edited:
What I want to say is that a spear does not really work like a spear in the game. Looking at realism can show, what is wrong. There are many examples in this thread that show some flaws different players argue about. The INF vs. CAV problem for example. In reality, a wounded horse will rear up or might panic in the game it is just an ablative shield for the rider that MIGHT stop if confronted with a spear.
If I had to rant, it would be the shields of the INF - they block too much. Yesterday, I played a match using a Battanian Wildling and used him for skirmish. What use was that? Always 'thunk-thunk-thunk' because the forcefield covers too much and absorbs 100% of the damage. And if I land some lucky shot, my javelin just does a ridiculous amount of damage like about 20-30 - for a hurled pointy object weighing some kilograms. Realism would tell me such a javelin would run you through, if hit so yes, indeed a one-shot. This is why you carry shields and javelins are limited, because you need to carry a significant weight with you.

I mean...if I am closing in and expose myself to the danger of being melee'd I'd rather feel SOME effect, but rather: no. My suggestion for that:
- make the shield forcefields granular with tanking 100% where the shield physically is and expand some force-field which will get weaker towards the end so only damage reduction. Set missile damage to 100% and see where it goes. And let the shields take 100% of the damage or even apply bonus damage for some heavier javelins so that some of them crack actually, when hit by several pilae. Currently, light INF with javelins is just crap. You get less men, because you have a thrown weapon but still they are useless and you are armed worse than regular INF so what point taking those classes? Nerfed beyond reason. Skirmishers are that powerful in the metagame not because they have an unfair weapon but IMO players rather play strangely. Reaction was tune down thrown damage - useless now, thank you. Same for archers. I do not feel shields being damaged over time and IF I hit something it is 12 damage or slightly above unless I am lucky because the target turned to the side exposing itself..then I get about 40. A headshot at point blank nets 70 but then I am hacked down because I do not get another chance to shoot. Instead, I see shields looking like porcupines and seemingly fit troops in perfect health. This is frustrating as well. Archers should be a threat enough to pin down a unit or deny an area for troops without a shield. And if they have a shield, they seem to behave like roman legionaires in testudo although not having interlocked tower shields reducing archers to worst equipped INF. There is a reason, why people like Aserai or Khuzait guards or Battanian Fianns: good armor and a two-handed sidearm as plan B. Playing light archers, you are bummed.

What I have seen the last games are party members taking CAV and playing the jousting game instead of threatening the skirmishers. If you leave alone your INF and only make rush tactics for them viable it is no wonder, why playing INF is no fun. The last games I partook were always watching 5 minutes until 2 players were finished with one-on-one jousting. Most games had in common that even if the setup was rather balanced one side was quickly destroyed because 2 of 6 players were doing their own stuff so the other side could concentrate with 6 units on 4. I ask: what is asked here? To buff INF to the point it can hold against 2-3 other troops just because those things happen? To nerf other assets that you need 3 of those units to take down 1 inf? INF is not fun, if your teammates let you hang dry, because on your own you cannot outrun cav and retaliate versus ranged. This is intentional, because INF works like that, but on the other hand terrible because playing INF really depends on team cohesion and team spirit.

Classically, skirmishers like peltasts, javelinmen and similar close in and harass the enemy. Main goal is: destroy their shields and disrupt their formation by killing some odd numbers or force them to face you (which creates an opening for other troops). Usually javelinmen were weak versus archers or cavalry but their hurled projectiles deadly.

Preventing Cav from taking heavy shields also feels wrong. Take a look - these look authentical. But as we can see, they only cover one side while the other is open and I cannot imagine turning my torso on the horse while carrying such a thing. I guess in the game we can because there is no collision between horse and rider and his gear. And a forcefield that goes over the boundaries of the shield clearly is not a good idea, isn't it?
hastingscavalry066.jpg


There are many things more, but we should take a look at the problem from two angles:
- what problems do we get, because players do stuff that was not intended?
- are the game mechanics enabling players to do silly, overpowered stuff?
This is the root of the problem. If the game would work 'realistically' in some vital regards, we would not have many problems we have now (well, maybe others) like mameluke guards jumping and rotating around in full armor continuously (hitting for 120+ dmg with their bardike) - seen that yesterday. INF is not only the problem - it is the way combat works in the game and this is not only a number game where to shift some. Understand how something works and then try to make a model. Model need not to be 100% realistic, but should still resemble the core aspects of the original

Example: thrown javelin. In realism it is a heavy thrown pointy deadly object. It should kill or disable upon hit (gamewise eliminate target). In game targetting could be different, range, weight could make less difference and whatnot - a model, you see? But nerfing its damage in the game so that you can take 3 of them and stll stand is wrong as it does not resemble the core of a javelin anymore. (DEADLY pointy object with limited range). This applies for other stuff as well.

Guess we could argue about more facets of the game - these are just my impressions.
 
Last edited:
And I ask "why" and "is that desired?". I cannot imagine that just changing some numbers will help in the long run. It will only lead to looking for even more absurd exploits of the new mechanisms and metagame changing to other units not nerfed to death. Next thing demanded would be "buff missile or CAV because INF is too strong" or other things.
My answer - or what I believe the answer is, is that the game allows for stuff not logical. That the answer is not simply "make kicks slower" or "reduce damage of weapon type X". My impression is, that combat is not modelled properly, that things are possible that should not be and cause problems. And this is where we should look at: "cure the cause, not the symptoms".
Some amount of stuff can be recuded to "I want every unit stand up to any other unit - perfect balance" - but then, combat is situative. An all-CAV team might be great versus an all archer team but weak to an all spearman team. All archers "should" be better than "all spears" and the list goes on not even regarding the map itself whether it is good for certain troop types and this is very difficult to judge (I wouldn't dare to as I am not experienced enough).
The problem is not purely the numbers.
To make an example:
We are talking about defensive playstyle should be discouraged by doing something with the kick timing or counterattack timing. In reality, a person trying to kick me could be bashed the same moment with a shield and be knocked over and same for people jumping - but it cannot happen in the game as INF cannot be knocked over but by CAV. Standing on one leg in combat is a bad idea so kicks should be a bad idea but for duelling. Defensive has its advantages because the attacker presents an opening for the defender to exploit first by raising/turning the weapon. He gives away signals. Then again, the defender has less reaction time as the attacker knowns, what he is going to do while the defender only guesses. This is not purely a game of numbers. But in the game momentum and balance are not represented leading to problems to be solved. A gyrating mameluke swinging a bardike should be exhausted and nauseous after some spins - he is not because the game does not model this and can do the dance of death indefinitively. What is the solution? Nerf bardike damage? Less Mamelukes per pick? Or "when swinging a heavy weapon to one side at speed, make is slower to turn back the other direction or give a speed penalty"? Or "when kicking reduce some timing" is the answer or is it rather "if kicking and receiving damage, you are knocked over". Some people think, they are swinging weightless lightsabres and be kung-fu monks while doing so and the game feels like it at some point.

Heck, what I desire most in captain mode currently is a tactical phase of 1-2 minutes in the lobby with a displayed map showing the cap points before each match so you can talk tactics with the team and not 15 seconds of speed-clicking loadouts while trying to say hello. And even acolytes like me have an idea what is expected or going on and not taking the blame of being a n00b. Yes, this takes out a bit speed per game, but seriously, american football is a game that is VERY swift and tactically upon execution but those small tactical talks are worth gold.
 
Last edited:
Hmm..snarky responses and ignorance to read or to regard other opinions not being able to be voiced in a 3 word sentence? Does that count as an iconic duo?
Excuse me for not showing a photo of a real medieval knight because fotos were not invented then.
fdac7631b4114adab48ed16ff0ecf802.jpg

Better?
And I believe I have shown reenactors, not LARPers...on a LARP I am pretty much sure, horses and stuff not made of plastic foam as a weapon and shield are not allowed. And reenactors orientate themselves at historical designs.
 
Last edited:
And I ask "why" and "is that desired?". I cannot imagine that just changing some numbers will help in the long run. It will only lead to looking for even more absurd exploits of the new mechanisms and metagame changing to other units not nerfed to death. Next thing demanded would be "buff missile or CAV because INF is too strong" or other things.
My answer - or what I believe the answer is, is that the game allows for stuff not logical. That the answer is not simply "make kicks slower" or "reduce damage of weapon type X". My impression is, that combat is not modelled properly, that things are possible that should not be and cause problems. And this is where we should look at: "cure the cause, not the symptoms".
Some amount of stuff can be recuded to "I want every unit stand up to any other unit - perfect balance" - but then, combat is situative. An all-CAV team might be great versus an all archer team but weak to an all spearman team. All archers "should" be better than "all spears" and the list goes on not even regarding the map itself whether it is good for certain troop types and this is very difficult to judge (I wouldn't dare to as I am not experienced enough).
The problem is not purely the numbers.
To make an example:
We are talking about defensive playstyle should be discouraged by doing something with the kick timing or counterattack timing. In reality, a person trying to kick me could be bashed the same moment with a shield and be knocked over and same for people jumping - but it cannot happen in the game as INF cannot be knocked over but by CAV. Standing on one leg in combat is a bad idea so kicks should be a bad idea but for duelling. Defensive has its advantages because the attacker presents an opening for the defender to exploit first by raising/turning the weapon. He gives away signals. Then again, the defender has less reaction time as the attacker knowns, what he is going to do while the defender only guesses. This is not purely a game of numbers. But in the game momentum and balance are not represented leading to problems to be solved. A gyrating mameluke swinging a bardike should be exhausted and nauseous after some spins - he is not because the game does not model this and can do the dance of death indefinitively. What is the solution? Nerf bardike damage? Less Mamelukes per pick? Or "when swinging a heavy weapon to one side at speed, make is slower to turn back the other direction or give a speed penalty"? Or "when kicking reduce some timing" is the answer or is it rather "if kicking and receiving damage, you are knocked over". Some people think, they are swinging weightless lightsabres and be kung-fu monks while doing so and the game feels like it at some point.

Heck, what I desire most in captain mode currently is a tactical phase of 1-2 minutes in the lobby with a displayed map showing the cap points before each match so you can talk tactics with the team and not 15 seconds of speed-clicking loadouts while trying to say hello. And even acolytes like me have an idea what is expected or going on and not taking the blame of being a n00b. Yes, this takes out a bit speed per game, but seriously, american football is a game that is VERY swift and tactically upon execution but those small tactical talks are worth gold.
I kindly ask you to formulate your suggestion as to how you would like to see the position of Infantry in Skirmish improved, because this piece of text is unreadable and it is really hard to take anything from this.
 
Back
Top Bottom