Best use of Skirmishing Units?

Users who are viewing this thread

Aliaksandr

Veteran
Learn to block.
It didn't really come in handy for the won by teams from skirmish mode, did it? In the videos you submitted, only the abuse of Rambo tactics, which @Tiedemannj mentioned here, is good noticeable (although I have a slightly different opinion on this). But I am sure that the great experience and excellent interaction of the team members played a decisive role in the victories of the skirmish mode teams. And it would be foolish to argue that such cool teams as APE and even more so DM are competitive in only one MP mode. But this does not mean that any other skirmish players can conquer the captains mode :cool:.
Now a new tournament of captains (https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?threads/bannerlord-captain-tournament.446958/) has started, in which the DM will also take part. A strong contender from the captains mode for them will be the KoV. And if the starting alignment of matches (or conscience maybe at last^)) does not favor the over-exploitation of Rambo tactics (still not balanced enough by the developers for some maps and factions), then I would bet on KoV.
PS: Do not think that I am against players mastering blocking or against any game modes other than captains mode. I am against only one thing, man - provoking enmity and conflict among the members of the community of this game.
 
Last edited:

S01DIER

Dont worry i got this one guys. Just play Cav
 
Last edited:

FearSpear

Squire
But I am sure that the great experience and excellent interaction of the team members played a decisive role in the victories of the skirmish mode teams. And it would be foolish to argue that such cool teams as APE and even more so DM are competitive in only one MP mode. But this does not mean that any other skirmish players can conquer the captains mode
APE is not a real clan -- we just picked a bunch of random NA skirmish players -- some of whom did not practice at ALL until their official matches -- and they absolutely wiped the floor with Captain's mode players. Nobody was coordinating beyond the sarcastic comment mocking how easy it was to kill you people in the game. All the skirmish players in the discord playing against the Captain's mode teams in their official matches were laughing and mocking you people.

Let me directly retort your second point: "This does not mean any other skirmish players can conquer the captains mode." APE was a team of just "whoever showed up to play" from NA skirmish. We did not bring our best cav players to fight you, in fact we only really had about 2 good cav players on the team that placed second in most of the matches, sometimes only 1 dedicated cav player. Likewise, DM did not bring 6 dedicated cav players against you.

Because of APE placing second with such a rag-tag group, I would go as far to say that any C-tier skirmish team and up could join into a Captain's mode tournament and beat every single Captain's mode only team that plays. This invalidates the moral right for your gamemode to even exist competitively.
 

Tiedemannj

Regular
WBWF&SVC
I would go as far to say that any C-tier skirmish team and up could join into a Captain's mode tournament and beat every single Captain's mode only team that plays. This invalidates the moral right for your gamemode to even exist competitively.
That doesn't follow at all. In fact the opposite should be true given your argument. Better players can easily beat worse players even in a mode that has a lot of random elements. That is, as far as balance goes, a good competetive mode by any subjective standard.

What you mean by moral right; I don't know, but the fact that people want to play it competetivly should be all the reason they need to do so. I'd argue it's even healthy for the mode that skirmish players come in and shake up the meta and show the importance of indiviual fighting skill. It proves that the mode has a higher skill ceiiling to grow into.
 
Sadly, I would tell you to use them to skirmish - but alas, this is not quite possible due to current meta.

A skirmisher - in my book:
- should be using hit and run tactics thus being a bit more fleet-footed than other infantry.
- weed out lightly armored troops using missile weapons or counter enemy skirmishers
- wound and/or encumber heavy troops by inflicting wounds and destroying shields (javelins SHOULD be able to disable shields or one-shot an enemy on a critical hit like they would in reality but they do not)
- assist heavier troops when it comes to melee by flanking other infantry - this one you could still do but I guess you team would be better off with another unit of dedicated melee infantry.

Unless they change something about the way armor, shields and missile weapons work they seem like a waste of time.

1) JOINT HURTBOXES and ARMOR HURTBOXES: an armor system that provide a way to balance factions warfare and make more deep the combat system(suggestions)
2) [POLL] SHIELD + STUCKED PROJECTILE = ENCUMBRANCE
I wrote these two threads in order to make what you write possible.
In summary:
the first thread talks about the armor system.
Instead of having 5 hurtboxes of the model all coverable, which leads, for game balance purposes, not to be able to increase the armor value, I propose to increase the hurtboxes and divide them into 2 categories:
-hurtboxes that can be covered by armor (in greater number, the larger in size).
-hurtboxes that cannot be covered by armor (fewer and smaller)
if the total hurtboxes were 10, then 6 would be covered and 4 not (1 for each direction of attack at least).
For reasons of load on the car, 10 would be enough.
And if we want to dream, let's do 16 + 8.

Since each fully covered character would still have 4 face up hurtboxes, it is less unbalancing to increase the armor value of armor.
In this way, heavily armored characters would be well defended in covered spots, but still beatable since they have weak points.
In this way, with ranged weapons and at very great distances, the probability of effectively hitting a target is proportional to the area exposed by the hurtboxes, which increases as the coverage of the hurtboxes decreases.
Up close, however, with ranged weapons, it would become a question of the aim of the wielder of the ranged weapon.
Furthermore, in the case of a warrior with a shield that does not protect his legs, if he wore heavy leggings on them, he would be strongly protected since the armor value in those points would be high.
In addition, in melee spam would be discouraged, since spamming makes the hits less precise and therefore the probability of hitting uncovered hurtboxes decreases.

The second thread deals precisely with the relationship between ranged weapons and shielded infantry.


Unfortunately my solution is considered less than the usual "increase the armor value", although in mine that aspect is also taken into consideration but considering the consequences it brings if applied without having taken countermeasures.
And the consequences of just raising the armor value (without touching the hurtboxes and doing the above) are an imbalance between units wearing different tier armor, as their armor value would differ too much.
Not to mention that by raising it too much, units that cannot be defeated in a "human" time would come out.
Not to mention that spam would be even more encouraged and the relationship with remote units would worsen in the opposite direction, that is, they would become useless both at distance and in melee.
 

Aliaksandr

Veteran
APE is not a real clan -- we just picked a bunch of random NA skirmish players -- some of whom did not practice at ALL until their official matches -- and they absolutely wiped the floor with Captain's mode players. Nobody was coordinating beyond the sarcastic comment mocking how easy it was to kill you people in the game. All the skirmish players in the discord playing against the Captain's mode teams in their official matches were laughing and mocking you people.

Let me directly retort your second point: "This does not mean any other skirmish players can conquer the captains mode." APE was a team of just "whoever showed up to play" from NA skirmish. We did not bring our best cav players to fight you, in fact we only really had about 2 good cav players on the team that placed second in most of the matches, sometimes only 1 dedicated cav player. Likewise, DM did not bring 6 dedicated cav players against you.

Because of APE placing second with such a rag-tag group, I would go as far to say that any C-tier skirmish team and up could join into a Captain's mode tournament and beat every single Captain's mode only team that plays. This invalidates the moral right for your gamemode to even exist competitively.
Judging by what you write here, you have serious problems with both perception and morality, dude. However, at the same time you declare about some kind of "moral right" to exist for a significant part of the gaming community. I do not want to aggravate your psychological problems, so I will not communicate with you further.
Turning to other visitors of this thread, I note that, based on the speech of this character, we can conclude that the victories of the skirmish mode teams in the captain's tournament were mainly the result of the total use unfinished for the captains mode game mechanics in the cavalry squad managing. Namely - the abuse of Rambo cav tactics by hardcore solo cavs. Well, under this circumstance, and taking into account the presence of the remaining generally experienced players, the mystery of the wins skirmish mode teams in the captains tournament can be solved.
It remains only to assume how significant the role of other team members was in this, as well as to talk about the honesty of such victories (I doubt this dude understand what I mean here:wink:).
 

FearSpear

Squire
However, at the same time you declare about some kind of "moral right" to exist for a significant part of the gaming community
If a team of cricket players went over to baseball and easily beat the best baseball teams despite not having a background in baseball, we would ask why does baseball exist as a competitive sport if every conceivable skill they are fostering is being grown in a different environment at a faster pace.
 

Zarthas

Knight
Aliaksandr, FearSpear is a quarter-troll(on his mother's side) and has to be occasionally fed. Don't be too worried about it.
Wow?! all the time I was sure that you are the only main skirmisher in the captains mode... the best at least. Who else do you consider your equal? Well, in essence, what you described is the best overview of the problems and a really great guide to using skirmishers in captains mode. Thanks for your time, mate.
Well that's very generous, but I suppose it is not hard to be the best if I am the only one :razz: I am probably the last of a dying breed. Truth be told, I only use the multiplayer badges so people don't blow up the chat with "RECRIUTS AER SO BAED".

I'm bummed that the Sling was removed before the new scoring system. I would have loved to see how much effect Sling Rabble + Khan play actually had damage-wise, you could absolutely wreck even heavy infantry teams over a long game if you positioned correctly. The flinch-stun capability of 23 slings should not be under-estimated.
 

Aliaksandr

Veteran
Yeah, the sling introduced variety (although it was not quite a sling:wink:), which, in turn, increased the requirement for skills and tactical experience when handling different weapons. I miss it now.
 

Spottswoode

Veteran
f1f5 works pretty well with skirmishers, so they retreat as they throw, same as archer function, but the skirms move a bit faster. they get stuck on object behind them so have to be careful not to be backing up against a building/wall
 

flashn00b

Veteran
All answers related to “they’re trash don’t ever use them” are unwelcome and will be disregarded- I am trying to learn EVERY class.
Thing is, the Sturgian Brigand is intentionally terrible since TaleWorlds seems insistent on having Sturgia be the worst faction in the game with the Berserker and Varyag being what carry their faction.

I think for every other skirmisher unit, it mostly boils down to getting the feel of being able to throw and move at the same time, though this mostly applies to non-Captain modes. Dunno how to play them on Captain, however.

Battania's Wildling has more leeway for different playstyles since he's actually one of two medium infantry units in the game (the other being Khuzait's Spear Infantry). If you opt for the Throwing Spear as the Wildling, you actually DON'T want to throw it since it's one of the best one-handed anti-cavalry melee weapons in the game.
 

Spottswoode

Veteran
.
Hey, so I’ve been getting more and more into skirmishers/hybrid infantry in captain mode, but the outcome seems hit or miss (pun intended), especially with Sturgian Brigands. Are there any tips you would like to share in using them effectively?

All answers related to “they’re trash don’t ever use them” are unwelcome and will be disregarded- I am trying to learn EVERY class.
I think to get the best out of Skirmisher class in the similar way to getting the best out of archers archers, your team has to be up for setting up the skirmishers to throw. Too often I think people see a Skirmisher as just another mele class so they look to engage early, but the Skirmisher needs time to get into position to throw early or be used as bait. If the rest of the mele classes just rush in the Skirmisher is as good as useless.
If I u have 2 teams with 6 inf on each side but the enemy side has skirmishers that's an instant advantage to our team in a rush. If the enemy rushes as well with their skirmishers then it's pretty much a 5v6 (as they are useless in mele) and they will get crushed. If they play a bit more defensively and draw our team in to the skirmishers and maybe retreat throw f1f5 while their army also retreats with the skirmishers they they have a chance to do some throw damage at least before the big melee fight and maybe thin out / break the formation of the enemy charge in the process.
 

Aliaksandr

Veteran
If I u have 2 teams with 6 inf on each side but the enemy side has skirmishers that's an instant advantage to our team in a rush. If the enemy rushes as well with their skirmishers then it's pretty much a 5v6 (as they are useless in mele) and they will get crushed.
This is perhaps one of the most common reasons why an under-experienced team is losing rounds now.
If they play a bit more defensively and draw our team in to the skirmishers and maybe retreat throw f1f5 while their army also retreats with the skirmishers they they have a chance to do some throw damage at least before the big melee fight and maybe thin out / break the formation of the enemy charge in the process.
The good news is that most players use this tactic when they have archers now. But with skirmishers this is rarely practiced, alas. I think this is because the level of experience (organization) of a team capable of implementing such a tactical idea allows it to hope to win in a fight in the ratio of 5 inf and 1 skirmisher against 6 inf or in similar stacks. And less experienced or disorganized teams simply won't be able to successfully execute such a complex tactical combination due to the need to maintain a much smaller distance (compared to archers) between enemy and friendly units. And even the presence of sufficiently experienced and familiar players in the team does not guarantee success in understanding and accepting such a complex tactical idea for implementation. Although, of course, it looks very interesting and effective.
Therefore, skirmishers should receive a buff that increases their effectiveness in the tactics you described or in any other tactics due to the functions assigned to them.
 

Safety_Tree

Recruit
This is perhaps one of the most common reasons why an under-experienced team is losing rounds now.

The good news is that most players use this tactic when they have archers now. But with skirmishers this is rarely practiced, alas. I think this is because the level of experience (organization) of a team capable of implementing such a tactical idea allows it to hope to win in a fight in the ratio of 5 inf and 1 skirmisher against 6 inf or in similar stacks. And less experienced or disorganized teams simply won't be able to successfully execute such a complex tactical combination due to the need to maintain a much smaller distance (compared to archers) between enemy and friendly units. And even the presence of sufficiently experienced and familiar players in the team does not guarantee success in understanding and accepting such a complex tactical idea for implementation. Although, of course, it looks very interesting and effective.
Therefore, skirmishers should receive a buff that increases their effectiveness in the tactics you described or in any other tactics due to the functions assigned to them.
In your opinion, what would such a buff take the form of? AI having less of a turning penalty for throwing weapons, given their need to run, turn, throw, repeat? Or a more subdued buff in the form of adjustment of AI behavior itself?
 

Spottswoode

Veteran
In your opinion, what would such a buff take the form of? AI having less of a turning penalty for throwing weapons, given their need to run, turn, throw, repeat? Or a more subdued buff in the form of adjustment of AI behavior itself?
Honestly F1F5 is one of the best bits of AI coding that TW have, it works really well especially re their turn and throw or archers turn and shoot rate. it just has to be used early enough by the player in order to be 100% effective. Skirmishers could use a boost to accuracy mostly. They have a high run speed so the retreat pretty quickly and don't take long to throw, but they suck at hitting targets. Increased accuracy is sorely needed for skirmishers. It's mostly the high looping throws that are extremely inaccurate, once the enemy is closer the straight close range throws can rack up fast damage on charging shieldless shock units.. but if you were to slow to use f1f5 they are chopping your down really fast and you might have killed 4 of them total by the time they finish your last unit off.

Accuracy definitely is the skirmishers ai thorn in their side and where the buff is needed, also ai throw aggression when stationary throwing is another area, they are reluctant to start throwing when stationary for some reason and wait way to long. F1f5 does seem to encourage them to throw a bit more aggressively as well as get them more space.
 

Spottswoode

Veteran
This is perhaps one of the most common reasons why an under-experienced team is losing rounds now.

The good news is that most players use this tactic when they have archers now. But with skirmishers this is rarely practiced, alas. I think this is because the level of experience (organization) of a team capable of implementing such a tactical idea allows it to hope to win in a fight in the ratio of 5 inf and 1 skirmisher against 6 inf or in similar stacks. And less experienced or disorganized teams simply won't be able to successfully execute such a complex tactical combination due to the need to maintain a much smaller distance (compared to archers) between enemy and friendly units. And even the presence of sufficiently experienced and familiar players in the team does not guarantee success in understanding and accepting such a complex tactical idea for implementation. Although, of course, it looks very interesting and effective.
Therefore, skirmishers should receive a buff that increases their effectiveness in the tactics you described or in any other tactics due to the functions assigned to them.
Haha, yeah it takes a lot of pleading your case to get people to retreat with you that's for sure, but once in a while everyone comes along for the ride in a random match and it's glorious! :smile:
 

Aliaksandr

Veteran
In your opinion, what would such a buff take the form of? AI having less of a turning penalty for throwing weapons, given their need to run, turn, throw, repeat? Or a more subdued buff in the form of adjustment of AI behavior itself?
To my regret (I am a consistent fan of realism in this game)), the mechanics of injuries are not implemented in BL. Everyone understands that a javelin in your body would slightly interfere with your enjoyment of running and fencing:wink:. Well, okay, we have what we have. But then at least the damage of throwing weapons should be increased. And here I would like to see the death of the enemy from being hit by no more than 2 javelins. And yes, they are professional throwers - they have to do it more precisely:smile:
 

FearSpear

Squire
To my regret (I am a consistent fan of realism in this game)), the mechanics of injuries are not implemented in BL. Everyone understands that a javelin in your body would slightly interfere with your enjoyment of running and fencing:wink:. Well, okay, we have what we have. But then at least the damage of throwing weapons should be increased. And here I would like to see the death of the enemy from being hit by no more than 2 javelins. And yes, they are professional throwers - they have to do it more precisely:smile:
very nice realism suggestion - 1000 pound warhorse hitting you at speed should also instantly kill you! very realistic! very nice balance suggestion captain's mode player
 

Aliaksandr

Veteran
very nice realism suggestion - 1000 pound warhorse hitting you at speed should also instantly kill you! very realistic! very nice balance suggestion captain's mode player
I doubt that a horse hitting can be fatal even for a very clumsy person, and even more so that it will be more painful and traumatic than the javelin in his chest... we here seem to think more about skirmishers, not so is it?
But, of course, in this part too, I would be glad to improve the game mechanics. This could be an increase in damage from a collision with a horse, depending on their equipment, horse's speed and position of the infantryman before the strike (here you can really allow the horse to trample the infantryman to death, if he was previously knocked down). But for captains mode, this would require increasing the adequacy of the AI response to the approach of riders. But is this all relevant while the X button works so fantastically for riders?😏
 
Last edited:

Aliaksandr

Veteran
Это доказывает, что режим имеет более высокий потолок навыков, в который можно вырасти.
Yes, Captains Mode does have a fairly large set of skills that need to be mastered at a high level in order to achieve some perfection. But, overwhelmingly, these are not individual skills. Many times I have met players who have 250+, 500+ and even 750+ victories and do not know how to use formations, retreat, bait, how to get the maximum efficiency (for the team) from the chosen types of squads, did not take into account the compositions of their own and others teams (for example, the presence of skirmishers in them ... now this is not offtopic:wink:), could not correctly determine the moment and direction of the attack, etc. And, although after the deprivation of many units of the second weapon, the introduction of perks and some other changes, this set has decreased in my opinion, but it still remains quite wide. And, of course, the great thing is that this set can expand and change its structure with the addition of new players and clans in the captains mode.
 
Top Bottom