搜索结果: *

Biggest problem? The lack of any 'strategic' element that made all those battles 'mean something'.

That and the fact you have no 'character development'.

Eventually, unless you have issues, you will get bored.

Bored = ex-player (like me)

CQReborn 说:

and I have a spare shield on my back.

My only point I really still feel strongly about now is how terrain seems to slow you down too much.

点击展开...

In case you've not read it somewhere, and I'm surprised nobody else has pointed it out, you suffer a SIGNFICANT movement penalty for carrying more than 1 shield.

In other words, some of the movement 'penalties' you are talking about are SELF-INFLICTED due to your decision to carry multiple shields.

Just FYI. Try removing a shield and see what difference it makes.

Apologies if you already know these other things...

- you won't get the 'run' movement bonus if you have a shield RAISED.
- you should, therefore, only use the raised shield when under direct threat. Movement is your friend. You can 'run' between points of cover, or when obscured from the defenders' views, and increase your effective movement rate.
- spend some time at the start in 'zoom' view to work out where defenders are. As is true in reality, knowledge of terrain and enemy deployment are vital to success. Just 'running to the castle' is often NOT the best idea. Sometimes you'll find a way in that the defenders aren't covering (such as to the castle's side or rear) and the time spent getting there can be worth it.

Just a few things to consider.

RAOUL 说:

Set the combat speed to fastest on the servers.

Faster is a joke, and is broken.

点击展开...

No thanks, ACC1.

I for one would prefer normal. That is, I assume, the speed the designers intended. As such it should be the default unless a clear majority of players express a desire otherwise.

An alternative might also be to have kick land some reasonable damage in itself but NOT stun.

You get close enough to get kicked, you take damage, but it's no longer the all but instant-kill move it is now.

You COULD consider reducing its range so it IS shorter than any 1H weapon, otherwise leaving it unaltered. That way it would only penalise those who genuinely really get in your face non-stop without any thought of positioning.

I'd prefer either of those to what it is now. Right now it's an effective counter to many 1H weapons leaving the person being kicked utterly open to being killed when they might not really have got all that close to their target (a Nord 1H axe only has a range of 70, for example, so you have to get pretty close).

Reapy raises some interesting things. Maybe either of the suggestions I've put might help strike a better balance than the current mechanism. I don't claim to have the answers (assuming there IS an answer), I'm merely asking others to think about it.

Cheers

Fish 说:

Steeltrap 说:

...................The game will not safe a config without ALL commands having a key assigned..........................

点击展开...

Well done. Worked like a charm!!!

点击展开...

You're welcome. As I said, I had same problem until I worked it out.

LEGION3000 说:

While people getting in the way so you hit them is annoying, reflective is better than straight FF as that setting in no way punishes the person who runs in swinging wildly. THAT person might kill a few team mates in their rush to a kill, but it doesn't STOP them doing it. Reflective WILL stop them as they will soon kill themselves. The Australia servers tend to have FF set at 60/40.

I know people will say 'ban/kick' those people, but:
1. you are limited to 1 poll per rotation, not round (I think), so you can't necessarily poll to remove those players doing it.
2. you're in no way assured that such a poll will succeed.
3. there are too many polls put up as it is.
So long as you rely on polls you are not assured that a person's thoughtless/inconsiderate play will be punished. Reflective FF is the ONLY way to make that a certainty.

It's unfortunate that servers can't be configured to have DIFFERENT FF settings based on attack type. I would set reflective on 100% for missiles as it's completely ridiculous the way archers fire into melee without concern for hitting their own team.

Cheers

点击展开...

Personally I think the -1 from killing your own teammate is a pretty big deterrent.  Most people can get away with having a -1 score without being kicked but pretty much everyone gets booted when they get to like -3.  Now if you could change that to be something bigger like -5 I doubt there would be very much teamkilling at all.  Especially with everyone protecting their precious K/D ratio.

点击展开...

Depends where you play. The K/D ratio is of no particular significance in-game. Money is to a limited extent. Neither of these things will directly influence a player's behaviour unless THEY choose to regard it as important.

I don't see the K/D matter addressing the failings I mentioned of relying on polls.

Cheers

Seawied86 说:

solution: Run Warband in administrative mode. Its trying to change a text file and windows 7 is blocking it.

点击展开...

I suspect my answer is the correct one, as I have win7 64-bit and had no troubles after finding the 'unassigned' command further down the page.

If it were a win7 issue, I would expect all users with win7 to have it irrespective of the key changes they make.

Cheers

Fish 说:

Hi all,
Just installed this game, on a Win7 machine. Under options and key configuration, i changed the default keys for some items, but when i leave the game and return they are back at default. Very frustrating, since i'm a left hander, and have to change these keys to play. Anyone else having this problem? Or any solution?

点击展开...

I had a similar problem.

The solution is this: scroll down ALL the key bindings and you will find your changes have left one or more OTHER ones 'unassigned'. I found one was lower on the page than is displayed so couldn't see it until I scrolled.

The game will not safe a config without ALL commands having a key assigned.

So, find the one(s) that is unassigned (it's probably something you'll never use) and give it a key.

Problem solved!

Good luck. Let me know if this ISN'T it, but I'm pretty sure it will be.

Berserker Pride 说:

Guess what making the game harder for everyone at higher ping to block decreases the challenge for players part of POM with low ping.  On medium you actually have to worry about how to beat someone with skill rather than just spin spamming random directions.

I wasn't being killed by swings I actually put a block to and there were some awesome fights.  They even have ff set not to reflect.   The trouble with reflect is it doesn't actually correct any behavior.  People still group up like a bunch of zerglings.  I can't count the number of times that I've killed myself because some moron was just off my shoulder out of view.  On regular ff you have to respect the combat zones of your teammates.

点击展开...

Agree with you about speed. The KEEN duel server in Australia uses medium. I played there last night and it was so much more enjoyable than the battle server with its inevitable mass cav/archer. Medium makes the game more accessible to more players IMO, and I can't see why that is a bad thing.

I don't agree with you about reflective FF. To be clear, I'm not saying you're 'wrong' as it is merely a matter of opinion and you're as entitled to yours as I am to mine. 

While people getting in the way so you hit them is annoying, reflective is better than straight FF as that setting in no way punishes the person who runs in swinging wildly. THAT person might kill a few team mates in their rush to a kill, but it doesn't STOP them doing it. Reflective WILL stop them as they will soon kill themselves. The Australia servers tend to have FF set at 60/40.

I know people will say 'ban/kick' those people, but:
1. you are limited to 1 poll per rotation, not round (I think), so you can't necessarily poll to remove those players doing it.
2. you're in no way assured that such a poll will succeed.
3. there are too many polls put up as it is.
So long as you rely on polls you are not assured that a person's thoughtless/inconsiderate play will be punished. Reflective FF is the ONLY way to make that a certainty.

It's unfortunate that servers can't be configured to have DIFFERENT FF settings based on attack type. I would set reflective on 100% for missiles as it's completely ridiculous the way archers fire into melee without concern for hitting their own team.

Cheers

Papa Lazarou 说:

An imblanced game is annoying, but so is being blocked by thin air. I'm pretty sure it's possible to balance all of my suggestions, so I'm not that fusssed about the effects on archery etc.

点击展开...

Perhaps I should have stated at the start that I thought your opening post was excellent and that it highlights many of the potential problems with the way things are now.

I wasn't so much disagreeing with you as trying to add some thoughts about how changing things as suggested in your post might have some unintended consequences. There's a danger in 'fixing' one set of problems only to 'shift the imbalance' somewhere else. I'm concerned those who want shields 'reduced somewhat against all attacks' may not have thought that through to some potential consequences.

Cheers

The trouble here is that shields are part of a complicated whole i.e. combat in all its forms.

I do agree that shield coverage against melee is excessive.

A few thoughts to toss in:

Missile fire is simply too accurate. Servers are increasingly degenerating into massed cav and missiles, as they are the 2 'easiest' ways to get kills (please don't flame; I mean they allow you to get kills with less risk generally that getting directly in HtH combat). If you reduce the cover against missiles, you will make it even worse.

The differences in abilities between 'classes' are not great enough to make that choice hugely significant. Once a person can block manually, Vaegir archers can be deadly due to the speed/reach of the elite scimitar. Nord archers often have 2H axes. Etc etc. I think it would make a big difference if the trade-off for being an archer was a far greater restriction on OTHER abilities, such as preventing you from using any 2H weapon (just as people are prevented from riding horses).

Make shields more expensive and you make archers even more potent. Why? Because you need a decent shield as inf or you won't even get close to missile troops before your shield is gone. After that you're screwed.

One thing that might help, and people have hinted at it, is playing around with the type of damage and damage bonuses against shields or armour. Perhaps all factions should get ONE weapon that INF can use with a bonus against shields.

IF you want to make arrows harder to block, you need to make shields stronger if they DO block. This is to reward those who are skilled at blocking them. It would be consistent with the rest of the skill in the game. What would happen would be a good blocker against missiles would be HARDER to bring down with missile fire, but the rest of the population (less skilled) would be MORE vulnerable without the shield 'forcefield'.

People who complain about being able to block thrusts from a horse with a weapon alone are ignoring just how stacked the odds are in favour of the horseman already. I block with a weapon because once you lose your shield, which you will very quickly, you are an archery victim. The whole 'balance' question of horses, particularly the way they knock enemies over but not friends, is worthy of a separate thread in itself.

Anyway, sorry for wall of text, but wanted to toss a few ideas/considerations into the discussion.

pants 说:

Steeltrap 说:

It is an exploit.

点击展开...

Nice to know people still make no sense

点击展开...

Tremendously helpful post. I made the mistake of assuming anyone at this stage of the thread would have read the rest of it.

In case I'd not made it abundantly clear in my other posts...

It is an 'exploit' in that it is being used largely as a cheap way of killing an opponent and NOT for the main reason people have claimed it exists i.e. to allow 2H to prevent 'facehugging' by 1H/shield users.

So, its effects (rendering the target defenceless) are being 'exploited' by all  (used in all fights by 1H and 2H wielders) in circumstances well outside the main justification (giving 2H an answer to facehugging) offered for it existing .

I trust that's clear enough for you.

Gumpy 说:

They're on medium at the moment, aren't they?

edit: ah, they're on the second highest. They were on medium the last time I checked

点击展开...

They were on medium, but changed to fast in the last wekk or 2.

It's not a change I welcome. As others have said, learning is probably easier on medium. The Aussie servers are struggling to have 30 players at any time. Anything that makes the skill difference even more relevant will simply drive off all but the most experienced. I'm seeing that happen already.....

Spent some more time on Oceania servers.

It is evident that kicking is rampant. Of the 1 v 1 fights I watched, close to 50% of them ended via kick/slash. For those who maintain it's there to balance 'facehugging', why is it people with shields and 1H use it? What do they have to fear from 'facehugging'? Absolutely nothing. It is in their interests for their enemies to be close, given the shorter ranges of many 1H (and certainly shorter than the 2H). Yet they use it A LOT, and the most experienced players are some of the heaviest users.

It is an exploit. It is terribly imbalanced. Its use is viral. It offers all sorts of advantages and virtually NO penalties for missing.

I feel that those people who have played for a long time are so used to it, and USING it, that they are no longer able to see it through fresh eyes. As a newer player (i.e. only started with Warbands' release) I see it as a horribly cheap way of defeating an opponent, one with almost no downside.

I have got better at avoiding it, but it makes using a shorter 1H particularly difficult when a person with a heavy shield can hide behind that AND kick you.

Were I a designer I would make quite a few changes, and this mechanic would be one of the first.

Looks like an average Saturday night on Oxford St (Sydney, for those of you not from there).....

HTAPAWASO 说:

Laszlo 说:

EdwardWellcraft 说:

I use a short arming sword in duels and have managed just fine against great-sword kick-slashers. The range on the arming sword is still longer than the reach of kick. Judge distance well and you won't be kicked.

点击展开...

That's actually a good point.

It's possible that using 3rd person view distorts our perception a bit and we move closer to our opponent when attacking than we really need to.

点击展开...

Definitely.

点击展开...

All of which is interesting, but doesn't it kind of to point to the fact that kick is seriously imbalanced? People are more or less conceding IF you get kicked you're all but screwed.

Rather than saying "dodge it" etc etc, surely it makes the point that the mechanism itself is the problem? As I said, get onto a MP game and see just how many times it is used to kill people.

None of this matters, however. I doubt the developers are even interested.

I've spent time watching from 'dead' on Oceania servers.

Here's what I see:

- kicking is endemic. Virtually EVERY fight I see has more than 1 attempt. They are often ended by it. Most frequent practitioners of it are the most experienced players.

- Oceania servers are lucky to have mroe than 30 people on them any evening. They are becoming mass-cav and archer fests with inf being run down or shot. Why? Because if you are a good inf fighter (by whcih I mean good at blocking more than anything else), there is no real penalty for playing the others. Nord archers get 2H axes, for example. BUT being cav/archers gives you ready access to 'cheap' kills on top of fighting HtH. It is making the environment toxic for newer players. If you want to play inf it is becoming very tiresome.

- a significant proportion of regular players are from clans. I have nothing against them, but I believe it is indicative of a game that is already stagnant (i.e. there aren't many 'newer' players who continue to return). In case anyone misunderstands me, let me make it clear I do NOT think the game is stagnating BECAUSE of clans.

For those who think kick/slash is fine I would counter that it is THE most frequently used method of killing someone in a straight up fight. Why? Because those who understand it know it is such an easy way to kill someone.

Kick/slash and the 'horse-bump' (especially fact it only affects enemies) are the two things which, were I a designer, I would overhaul immediately. I have a host of things I would recommend, but I don't see there being much point.

I've spent a fair bit of time improving my skills but I am finding the MP so predictable (mass cav, lots of archers, 2H swing-kick-kill) it is fast becoming boring.

Cheers

Absolutely will not play on servers without it.

As HTAPAWASO said, we got the Oceania servers to default to it.

It is the ONLY way to ensure a person cannot TK (they will kill themselves first 99% of time, or possibly take their team mate with them).

It is the BEST way to teach people they can't all rush into a confined space spamming 2H weapons. Indeed, it means a clever opponent who is outnumbered can use it to confound the enemy. Without it, you spam 2H and kill a team mate. Is it their fault for 'getting in the way' or yours for not watching what you're doing? I'd suggest both, which is why 60/40 works well.

It stops archers firing into melee without any thought of the consequences. Hit a team mate in melee with a missile WITHOUT relective damage and you'll piss them off but suffer no particular penalty. If you kill YOURSELF, you soon learn to be careful, just as you would in real life.

The people who don't learn are very quickly shunned. Relying on polls to address TK's is not effective as polls can fail. Reflective damage NEVER fails.

It is the greatest, simplest way of making a person suffer the consequences of their actions.

As for those complaining about others 'stealing' 'your' kills, I would suggest any team exercise means they aren't YOUR kills....the idea is for the TEAM to get kills. Now if we could alter the $$$ reward system along these lines in the team types of battles, that would be the best of all solutions.

Cheers

HTAPAWASO

Understand what you're saying. I'm below you and the other clan guys. I can kill 'newer' players.

Point of all that is it tends to accentuate what I was saying. When experienced people face 'near-certain death' against some, it's infiinitely worse for newer players.

I've tried to encourage others to play it, and most of them have made comments to the effect that they just don't find it fun, even after playing several times for a few hours.

I've stuck at it yet find various things really irritating, particularly the kick/slash (yet another way for more experienced players to rub your nose in it, even when they don't need to) and the really, really bad way cavalry are handled (they knock you all over the place yet don't touch a hair on the head of their team mates with whom you are in melee being my first and largest complaint...my most common experience with cav is they just ride around and INTO melee as they need not worry about hurting their own side and often get cheap kills, many of the best K/D ratios are achieved by cav yet they are often not anything special on the ground, with some notable exceptions).

Most of the people I have tried to introduce to it have quit. We can conclude they are impatient, 'no good' or whatever, but when I can't get some of the highly experienced gamers I know to take any real interest in it, I think there are probably issues not entirely explained by those people's attitudes/skills.

I still enjoy it, but am getting frustrated by some of the things I've mentioned. The biggest issue for me is there aren't enough players in Oceania for there to be a great shoice in game type ('deathmatch' is about 75% cav and archers, so if you want inf it's pathetic; 'battle' has a lot of clan players who are decent enough guys/girls but DO represent a real issue for new players who'd like to be something more than cannon fodder; 'duel' seems to have about 5 people in it... etc etc).

Cheers

JackBaldy 说:

Well, I didn't say you were incapable of getting a kill without knowing how to block, I just stated that if you wanted to be effective and not have a 1 to 8 ratio, you're probably going to have to want to learn to block... Just sayin' (When I say you, I'm generally speaking. Just wanted to clarify). In my personal opinion, I believe that Warband is no where near casual. In fact, I think it's pretty hardcore in most aspects. Just giving my two cents.

点击展开...

This time I agree with you.

Warband is NOT casual, certainly not in Oceania, where the player base is small-ish to start and there are people who have been playing as far back as the start of beta.
The result is there are killing machines, intermediates, then 'fresh' players.
If you are not prepared to die over and over WITHOUT EVER scoring a kill, you won't play in Oceania. I have seen this time and again. People come in, play for a while, then leave. When I look at the stats in battles etc, they are disproportionately skewed to a few players. That tells me skill is a considerable factor.
I KNOW for a fact there are people who, when I encounter them, I will almost always die. There are, in fact, some against whom I DO always die (they also kill everyone else most of the time, but then they don't play public servers often).
The gap between skilled players and beginners is huge in the way it affects the results of the game. The sad fact is it a turn off for a lot of potential players. Those who say 'good' I say "ask the developers if they want to sell 10,000 copies to obsessive types, or 100,000 to more casual players". If you're not an idiot you'll realise the latter is the way for devs to have the resources to build more games/develop this one.

You can compare this with TF2.
TF2 is a silly game, BUT IT IS FUN. It's casual in that you can get into it quickly AND GET RESULTS. Sure, the good players will always do better, but you can start off and very soon be killing things.
The same is NOT true of warband anywhere near the same extent. If your experience is you get killed by cav or archers EVERY TIME, or, if you DO make it to melee, you are killed in a heartbeat and YOU NEVER IMPROVE IN THE NEXT HOUR, you will find that discouraging.

If people don't think this is an issue then I respectfully disagree, unless you are considering it from the narrow, self-interest of the experienced players who care only for their K/D ratio and not about the M&B devs and likely survival.

Off topic, I know, but thought I'd make comment on some things in here.

(p.s. JackBaldy, what's with the just sayin' in every post?)