搜索结果: *

Hi.

Me and my friend are looking for a well organized but laid back EU regiment that participates in line battles (and such) events.

We are good at taking and following orders, but we cannot guarantee that we can participate in regular trainings every week. But we would like to participate when our work/school and other hobbies permit. We have both played warband since it's beta. We have played cRPG, but are pretty new to Napoleonic battle. We are good at infantry melee, not so much with horses.

If you have a good spirited EU regiment, that does not take things too competitively and does not require regular weekly training participation, please respond

So, since you derailed the topic to Ensiferum, I must point out that I "acted" as a zombie in From Afar music video. (I am the dude at 3.50 rising from the grave).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALrjjJdmxgA


Now, in light of this new information, its not too late for 22nd to concede tonights battle...

Archonsod, you are making this topic a source of ridicule. Please stop. The OP has valid points about autoblocking, and you are not helping.

I would like to get in as an extra. Anthallas & irc://Anthallas

If we know the relative speed and the weight of a weapon, we could just calculate the kinetic energy of the weapon, and include that to the math.

Taking the kinetic energy into account, would mean that hitting with a fast and light weapon has less change to result in stunning the attacker. On the other hand blocking with same light weapon could easily result in a stun.  So, result would be: Hitting with light vs heavy: small to no stun for attacker. Blocking with light vs heavy: stun to blocker.

Blocking thrust (or lances), is more deflecting the strike, than blocking. So, the defender just moves the approaching weapon to the side, pushing against the thrusts side movement (which is practically non existant). So, no stun for blocking thrusts, if we want to stay in touch with reality.

This actually is very good news:

Dedicated servers now create event logs.

Expecially if it means that you can take an eventlog of the fight itself, not only on crash reports and such. Detailed eventlogs could enable continious multiplayer campaigns, where the war progresses depending on losses/victories in the server.

Should circling be prevented by lowering speed that a character can circle, instead of making these forcefield shields? I mean, you have to click right mouse button, and you are nearly invurnerable. Doesn't that sound a little too easy to be fun?

Yeah. IMO shields are a little too easy to use. They should require more skill than just pressing the right mouse button. Some kind of aiming or something.

I don't think you can fix nakedness with a penalty. Instead normal clothes or light armour should slow people as little as no clothing, or near enough. Then you eliminate the need to be naked, instead of adding an unrealistic, unneccesary penalty.

Also, there is no reason why a naked person would not be able to defeat a knight. I mean, if I wear a shirt, I don't get magical knight slaying abilities, do I?

I am not in the beta.

That being said, there are some realism points about bows I would like to point out.

1. The stronger bows should have the reticle expand faster (hard to pull back). Also, the stronger bows should be a little slower to draw back. Pulling back a longbow requires a lot of strenght. Doing that once per 3 seconds is not impossible, but keeping it up more than couple volleys is an inhuman feat.

2. There are other factors than gravity affecting the accuracy of an arrow. Gravity is a constant, wind and the quality of the arrow is not. That being said, arrows should always have some deviation in their trajectory, unless the range is very short.

3. Amount. No one really carries 10 throwing axes or 80 arrows with them. I would suggest balancing other factors first, but there is this too.

Well, what I am getting at, is stamina, I suppose. Firing a bow is really exhausting, so after shooting 20 arrows, your aim would sway from exhaustion and you would not be able to outrun anything. I must say I am quite amazed that stamina is still not implemented, since it is such a relevant factor in combat. The problem with bows could be solved by making the drawing a bit slower, and running with a drawn bow slower, but these restrictions would eventually be artificial, and thus feel unrealistic and annoying. Stamina, however, would also make the movement penalties from armour more realistic and affect the melee combat too.

I think that there are some important settings that has to be taken into consideration before wondering what "class" or type of soldier will dominate in M&B multiplayer.


1. Difficulty settings. I play with 160% difficulty. Thats with full difficulty plus directional blocking. Also, playing withaut aiming reticle will help to down power the ranged troops. In my opinion it would be quite realistic too. I suppose there are many serverside settings and modding possibilities to tweak the settings affecting game balance. This also means that everyone can probably find a server which suits their style of play

2. Character settings. Premade classes with prechosen equipment? Remember that it is not granted you can have "enough" power draw, riding and horse archery to be an effective horse archer. We are all used to playing with our "lord" characters that has enough skills to place an arrow to enemys eye from quite a distance.

In multiplayer it might be that you cannot play a horse archer that can have the best bow, enough weapon skill,  power draw, horse archery, riding and armour to be HALF as effective as in single player. So, practically I am saying that playing a horse archer in singleplayer might be totally different from playing a horse archer in multiplayer.


I believe there will be quite a good balance between different troop types. For example spears and pikes are exellent against charging cavarly, but also for fighting from the second rank. Lets say that I have rhodok spearmen. First rank is using shield and sidearm and standing in a line leaving small gaps for the other rank to thrust their spears between them. The first rank can concentrate on defese and the second rank can concentrate on offense.

Two handed weapons (glaives, axes) should alse be good when used from behind shield armed infantry. Depending on how high abilities and weapon skills ranged troops have, a heavily armoured infantry with 2 handed weapon might not be that easy to take down. In singleplayer its easy to place an arrow on his head, but a human player might not run straight to you, and once again, you might not have 300 skill in archery.

Mounted troops might perform more flanking manouvers and work more as a team unlike in singleplayer. Horse archers might be very usefull in attacking formations from unexpected directions, instead of "kiting" a single enemy. It might even be, that its REALLY hard to hit a single enemy from horseback! Which in my humble opinion is as it should be.

Someone mentioned that crossbows suck. Yes, they are not as good as bows, but bows require power draw. So, if you have to choose between power strike OR power draw, crossbows might suddenly sound better.