SO1DIER
What ur suggesting is more of a teamwork issue then game design
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
About the recent archer spam i'm seeing in this game
- Thread starter flashn00b
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Friendly fire can't be done or will take too many hours to program. Or they would have implemented it long time ago. Maybe SP need's to be done first.. No one got any clue when or if that will happen, not even TW it looks like
What I am saying is : Cav is just fine as they are now. Archers are just fine as they are now. The solution to a enemy that is heavy on Archers, or any other class is not super cav, that can't die and will couch through em all like butter with no effort or any player skill. If you got a team that sux, then don't think you can just go cav all alone with no support, and get 50-1. Where the hell is the fun in that???
Thing with an all-archer team is that they barely need any amount of skill at all to win against literally anything else. The need to have any sense of accuracy all but evaporates when you can simply just shoot more projectiles than the enemy, and you'll eventually land enough hits that the enemy is not just killed, but outright annihilated.
And as mentioned in another thread, arrows can sometimes go through shields, meaning there goes the idea of using a shieldwall to advance on an enemy. I've already said my piece about how cavalry's just a bigger and easier to hit target. Point being, infantry and cavalry are currently unplayable due to Bannerlord's current balancing, and it's no wonder that the game's multiplayer is such a ghost town that the only people playing it are the folks who absolutely refuse to buy anything on the Epic Games Store. I ask again: what will happen to Bannerlord's multiplayer when Chivalry 2 leaves EGS exclusivity? Because as i've mentioned earlier, BL MP in its current state is an archer spam fest while multiple classes are either useless or OP relative to the gold required to spawn as them.
If people want a medieval game, there's Chivalry 2 and Mordhau. If people want a shooter, there's literally anything else. Or if they absolutely want a medieval skin in their FPS, Amid Evil exists.
And as mentioned in another thread, arrows can sometimes go through shields, meaning there goes the idea of using a shieldwall to advance on an enemy. I've already said my piece about how cavalry's just a bigger and easier to hit target. Point being, infantry and cavalry are currently unplayable due to Bannerlord's current balancing, and it's no wonder that the game's multiplayer is such a ghost town that the only people playing it are the folks who absolutely refuse to buy anything on the Epic Games Store. I ask again: what will happen to Bannerlord's multiplayer when Chivalry 2 leaves EGS exclusivity? Because as i've mentioned earlier, BL MP in its current state is an archer spam fest while multiple classes are either useless or OP relative to the gold required to spawn as them.
If people want a medieval game, there's Chivalry 2 and Mordhau. If people want a shooter, there's literally anything else. Or if they absolutely want a medieval skin in their FPS, Amid Evil exists.
Last edited:
SO1DIER
People keep screaming about Balance but lets make sure y'all are putting everything into context.
1. Skilled based game: The more you play the better you get. A brand new player will have a hard time compteteing with well seasoned veterans of the MnBs. nothing about balance will change the skill of these players.
2. Teamwork: Whatever stragey the other team uses if its an all archer team or a 3 way split cav/archer/inf whatever it is each game is a new game its up for the people on ur own team to either pull it together or lead by example.
3. Dialing in each class of play: I'm not a fan of the perk system ingame. I believe an archer or inf should be able to pick up or use or ride what they want at the same level a cav class could ride. I believe the perk system creates more fraction then what its worth. Each item is its own item ingame there shouldnt be a perk system that give you certain types of benefits for what every class you pick. everyone ingame should have the same equal playing field not decided by perks
1. Skilled based game: The more you play the better you get. A brand new player will have a hard time compteteing with well seasoned veterans of the MnBs. nothing about balance will change the skill of these players.
2. Teamwork: Whatever stragey the other team uses if its an all archer team or a 3 way split cav/archer/inf whatever it is each game is a new game its up for the people on ur own team to either pull it together or lead by example.
3. Dialing in each class of play: I'm not a fan of the perk system ingame. I believe an archer or inf should be able to pick up or use or ride what they want at the same level a cav class could ride. I believe the perk system creates more fraction then what its worth. Each item is its own item ingame there shouldnt be a perk system that give you certain types of benefits for what every class you pick. everyone ingame should have the same equal playing field not decided by perks
There's not much skill in bullying an enemy from extremely long ranges when they can't fight back. As i've mentioned earlier, you really don't need to have good aim if you're in an all archer team, especially if the enemy is attempting to use cavalry in response to your archer spam. There's such a thing called "accuracy in volume" which is often your average Bannerlord player's favourite method of securing a win with very little effort on their part. But since you've invited the "skill issue" argument, I suppose I should mention how some classes in the game are either absolutely useless or outright overpowered relative to the amount of gold that they cost.
The Peasant units aren't really intended to be a particularly strong unit but since we are talking about a competitive multiplayer game, they still need to have enough firepower to be an appealing choice for late joiners, so that they can score a few kills (with more effort than if they picked a shock troop or archer) while also conserving their gold. Good examples of this are the Aserai Tribals, Battanian Clan Warrior and Khuzait Rabble. Meanwhile, we have the wimpy recruit who's been the worst peasant in the game for as long as I can remember (even the 80 cost Peasant Levy is better than the Recruit), and is an intentional design decision to fit the lore of the Calradian Empire having a massive conscript army that's basically naked but compensates for their larger numbers.
Or if we look at the Sturgian Brigand, there's really no reason to pick him at all since 9/10 times, it's better to spawn as a Better Axe/Spearman Sturgian Warrior, with the 1/10 times being if you absolutely need an anti-cavalry unit, in which case, you'd pick Improved Armor/Strong Arm Brigand, but similarly to the Imperial Recruit, you're basically naked outside of your horse stabber, which is also what better be a one-hit kill if you absolutely need to throw it at an infantry. I dunno what the lore explanation is for Brigands being as weak as they are, but they are almost as bad as Recruits and their suckage seems to be intentional.
To finish things off (and somewhat go back on-topic) at what's absolutely overpowered, I'm pretty sure i've mentioned several times about how Vlandia can spend 160 gold on what's essentially a boss battle at best, and a god mode cheat at worst. Enter the Sharpshooter: he can deal enough ranged damage to one-hit bodyshot most infantry and cavalry in the game, while also having enough armor to allow him to screw up half his blocks and still win a melee fight. And i'm supposed to nod my head and think to myself "Yep. That's perfectly balanced". I don't think there's anything that trivializes individual player skill in the same way the Sharpshooter does. Once again, you need to remember how much the Sharpshooter costs relative to other units in the game, and I can assure you that he can generally ruin your life a lot more than a Khan's Guard or Fiann ever will.
SO1DIER
Alot of the frictions you have wrote are all becasue of the perk system idea. We should be able to pick whatever we wanna use when entering a game. This is why the perk system sucks. What a better way to fix balance then allowing the players to pick and choose for them self's.
Some ingame items are useless but I would say that it is only making the game more realistic and pushing players to use other equipment.
As much as everyone wants MnB's to be a competitive game it never was intended to be. This same argument was in past betas and alphas in previous MnB's. The game has many different applications of use that can be played by many different types of gamers. I think we all relaize how easy it be for them to interduce its own competitive system but to this day there was never one created.
Everything was community driven and we know this becasue the mod community plays such a big role when the full releases happen.
Also I understand that some of the equiment in game is pretty pointless but people need to make sure they know how to use it and where is the best position to be in when countering another player. Same goes with dealing with archers. If you dont wanna get hit by one then stay away from the line of fire.
Last edited:
![[UNC]V](/data/avatars/m/578/578531.jpg?1649722959){kind=avatar}
agree
Players that think archers need a nerf, 100% never play archers... It just a pathetic try to help that class you like to play the most.
SO1DIER
All these concerns by players I believe is because of the Perk system. Your Thoughts?
Warband didn't have a perk system and all archer teams could still destroy anything resembling a well-rounded team composition. The only reason why it doesn't happen often is because most Warband players had enough honor to not spam an overpowered class. I'd still be playing Warband but most of the playerbase has moved onto other games.
Meanwhile, such demonstrations of honor do not exist in Bannerlord's playerbase, so it's up to TaleWorlds to curb the frequent usage of archers in favour of throwing some inf and cav in the mix
If archers are so so overpowered and impossible to kill. Why don't you guys just play that class then? That would fix all problems you might have with balance and player skill, and you will be the one dishing out damage and make super easy kills with no efforts or disadvantages at all, instead of being owned by them and demand a class u never play, being nerfed?
Because other games exist if I wanna play a shooter. And no, playing an overpowered class doesn't fix the problem i have with Bannerlord's balancing. Instead, I become a part of the problem with why people would rather turn to a universally loathed game launcher just to continue playing a medieval multiplayer game. To quote myself and another user in this thread:
I'd like to think that if infantry and cavalry were viable in Bannerlord, Chivalry 2 would've been relegated to "wait a year for the Steam release but eventually forget about it" hell, but the archer situation is so insufferable that enough people would rather use the Epic Games Store than sit through TaleWorlds' intentional imbalancing just because their game on Steam and the competing product isn't.
Last edited:
But, you have no problem to be "part of the problem" if the class you play is overpowered. Being archer is not like a tactical shooter, it's simply not the case. You would know that if you actually would play the class.... That's my point. You need objectivity to make balance fixes. Or you will go back and forth between having overpowered cav that can't be killed and archers that can't hit anything and will make 12 damage per headshot... Back and forth... I think the main problem for you guys are when there is many archers on the battlefield, but that don't justify a balance fix.. Your team could just go all archers too or all shields or all cav, instead of damning archers to hell every time they get you
Olaf; I see what you are saying, but you must admit range mechanics in both warband and Bannerlord are by far the easiest in the game. Its the easiest class to do well with and that is fine but if its going to project melee levels of dmg from a distance at a very fast rate -something- has to be done to make it more skillful. Range as it is in Bannerlord right now does not require much skill. The game would benefit greatly from slower pacing especially in the range department.
Another thing to consider; Take a veteran of Warband for example, playing any range character they do massive dmg from afar, then you close in and their class is capable in melee aswell. So nothing is stopping these archers from picking up melee weapons and being both effective in combat and at range. But melee can not pick up bows and hope to be effective due to low weapon proficiency, melee weapon proficiencies matter much less.
The thing is in both Bannerlord and Warband there is no middle ground for Balance, you can spend decades trying to "balance" things and by doing so you will break other things. The best thing the developers can do is try to make it so everything requires similar level of skill to use. Which in return will be extra rewarding when you do well with a specific class.
Another thing to consider; Take a veteran of Warband for example, playing any range character they do massive dmg from afar, then you close in and their class is capable in melee aswell. So nothing is stopping these archers from picking up melee weapons and being both effective in combat and at range. But melee can not pick up bows and hope to be effective due to low weapon proficiency, melee weapon proficiencies matter much less.
The thing is in both Bannerlord and Warband there is no middle ground for Balance, you can spend decades trying to "balance" things and by doing so you will break other things. The best thing the developers can do is try to make it so everything requires similar level of skill to use. Which in return will be extra rewarding when you do well with a specific class.
SO1DIER
MR.Speaker, let me remind the fellow party that im speaking of Bannerlord not warband. Also let me mention that the perk system did exsis in other EA releases.
And you're suggesting that archers are OP because of the perk system. My counterargument is that archers were always overpowered since the early beginnings of Mount&Blade multiplayer, which was well before anyone even knew that Bannerlord was going to be a thing.
SO1DIER
Mr.Speaker I do agree that the perk system does cause more harm then good. Why should players have to pick between what perks they want instead of what items they would like to use.
FF was included until a few months ago. All they have to do is prioritise this fix. What would be a good alternative? Wasting another 2 years on useless balance patches because there are no custom servers?
We archers could still jump and dodge which i personally would specialize in, slower is different than slow af, idk if you mean to imply its the same or similiar and i can duck and jump over swords and headshot point blank still and do my usual CQB archery in bannerlord but it sounds like others are saying that i wouldn't be able and personally thatd make me consider bannerlord that much closer to unplayable.
