[Captain mode] Non cav classes shouldn't be able to mount on horses.

Users who are viewing this thread

exactly, you said it yourself, CAVALRY, not infantry on horses, that needs to change it would be a great buff for horse archers
Khuzait already has khans guard and lancers which are great at everything. Rabble/spear infantry rush is also good even though they don't have 2-handers. Khuzait doesn't need horse archers to be dominant. Having that third strategy of horse archers is more than any of the other factions have. Yes, they need to make the horse archer AI better, but they don't need to give them better equipment.
 
I completely disagree with this sentiment. HA have some of the fastest horses in the game, and should not be catchable by any other unit even on a horse. This is purely a management and teamplay problem.
 
Khuzait already has khans guard and lancers which are great at everything. Rabble/spear infantry rush is also good even though they don't have 2-handers. Khuzait doesn't need horse archers to be dominant. Having that third strategy of horse archers is more than any of the other factions have. Yes, they need to make the horse archer AI better, but they don't need to give them better equipment.
I've actually made a post on this. I don't know why Khuzaits don't have less than mediocre infantry. They should have these top tier lancer cavalry troops and horse archers, and on the downside, have trash infantry to have as support with spears for archers and cav.

I completely disagree with this sentiment. HA have some of the fastest horses in the game, and should not be catchable by any other unit even on a horse. This is purely a management and teamplay problem.
A cavalry player is always faster than your troops, no matter how fast the horses on your troops are. Then add in the (all) maps with barely no room to move as cav in most spots. When the enemy comes at you with cav, you have literally nowhere to run. You will be slower, and you will be butchered. Especially by rambo cav players, against whom the AI horse archers definitely can't do anything.
 
I think being able to mount horses is vital, there is a reason why you can just hit the horse and it will run away. I can see turning down the riding stats though of certain units. In my mind though, it makes sense that certain factions will have a higher base riding stat across their troops then others (aserai and khuzait) because of their factions lore.
 
remove ability for inf captains to use menav and lance on horses

Just remove the ability to pick up any equipment (except maybe arrows for archers) and the ability to mount horses for non cav classes. The latter being extremely easy to do since there's already a system called riding skill in the game, of which you just need to lower the value.

I think being able to mount horses is vital, there is a reason why you can just hit the horse and it will run away. I can see turning down the riding stats though of certain units. In my mind though, it makes sense that certain factions will have a higher base riding stat across their troops then others (aserai and khuzait) because of their factions lore.
Why is it vital? And the reason why horses run away is because if you hit a horse in the face with a sword, it will attempt to run away. And honestly I honestly don't think it's a good idea to make any other troop than cav be able to mount horses. It just screws up the balance.
 
I agree with the OP, this is a problem on siege also. You can kill a rider but if you leave the horse alive(and it is VERY difficult to kill them without them running away, especially the armored ones) some peasant/shock troop will take it while the killed cav player spawns another horse. The situation ends up with cavalry and "cavalry" numbers snowballing out of control untill like 50% of the server is mounted.
 
Why is it vital? And the reason why horses run away is because if you hit a horse in the face with a sword, it will attempt to run away. And honestly I honestly don't think it's a good idea to make any other troop than cav be able to mount horses. It just screws up the balance.
Because it would make cavalry next to impossible to kill in the endgame, and make them that much more annoying with trolls running around on them until morale runs out. Besides, honestly cav is powerful enough as is. The units are amazing, the AI is not.
 
People always talk about slowing down infantry units who mount a horse, what about slowing down horsemen who dismount? Shouldn't it work both ways and those Jockeys should be slow on foot?
 
我认为有可能赋予不同的士兵马术技能,因此在多人步兵和cross兵中,他们需要具备足够的马术技能才能骑马。
Google translate:
"I think it is possible to give soldiers different equestrian skills, so in multi-person infantry and cross soldiers, they need to have enough equestrian skills to be able to ride a horse."
 
I just love when people are using arguments like "It's not realistic!!!". I mean, this is a strategy game. It's about creating a balance, that makes most fun to play on a tactical level. If you want to play a "realistic" game, Bannerlord M&BII is not for you.

I never seen any captains complain about, that a inf class can ride a horse. I actually enjoyed to ride a horse with varyags, or any other non cav class. I also loved to pick up a bow and arrow as a inf player. To have the possibility to use gear dropped or left behind was such a great feature. Tactical, before the update that implemented the nerfing of ALL dropped weapons, you had to be careful. Because, you don't want to leave any stray cav behind for the enemy to use against you, do ya?. And, When the game quite often go into "skirmish phase", picking up a bow as inf, or bardiche as archer, was a strong move, if you have the skill to use it that is.

Now, it is the most lame feeling to ride a horse with a non cav class. The great tactical feature, that no one complained about, is gone now, and makes the cap mode experience less funny.... TW Change it back plz....Thx
 
Google translate:
"I think it is possible to give soldiers different equestrian skills, so in multi-person infantry and cross soldiers, they need to have enough equestrian skills to be able to ride a horse."
I thought about it...And I think it would be most fair to keep the "skills" bound to the cav or weapon that is left behind or dropped. And before anyone will use the "not realistic" argument. I have trained all my soldiers to have multi skills!
 
Really glad they brought in the change, please don't put it back, make it more extreme! No peasants on horses at all! I mean peasants just yoloing AI from horseback with 2 handers, if you like tactics and strategy you'll want it out of the game.
 
Because it would make cavalry next to impossible to kill in the endgame, and make them that much more annoying with trolls running around on them until morale runs out. Besides, honestly cav is powerful enough as is. The units are amazing, the AI is not.
Next to impossible to kill in the endgame? You know we have spears right?
I never seen any captains complain about, that a inf class can ride a horse. I actually enjoyed to ride a horse with varyags, or any other non cav class. I also loved to pick up a bow and arrow as a inf player. To have the possibility to use gear dropped or left behind was such a great feature. Tactical, before the update that implemented the nerfing of ALL dropped weapons, you had to be careful. Because, you don't want to leave any stray cav behind for the enemy to use against you, do ya?. And, When the game quite often go into "skirmish phase", picking up a bow as inf, or bardiche as archer, was a strong move, if you have the skill to use it that is.
Actually the biggest problems are exactly in captain mode. Infantry equipment wasn't developed and balanced around them being essentially cavalry. Why play a knight at all if you can have better armor and weapons and just mount one of those dozens of horses just running around?
And the cheesing which comes from all these kinds of dumb exploits makes captain just lose its whole point.
"Let's have a mode where the point is tactics and commanding your troops, but instead of commanding your troops, leave them all on the edge of the map and just fight the dumb AI yourself without any real counters. OR as shock infantry just break the game balance by finding a shield and a horse to make the enemy archers just not shoot at your charging shock infantry."
Why do people want to break the game balance?? It's definitely not fun for anyone that some cheesers just brainlessly abuse game mechanics so that they can win a battle from which they literally gain nothing.
...To have the possibility to use gear dropped or left behind was such a great feature. Tactical...
If "tactical" means completely breaking the balance between several classes and pretty much force players to either play by this AI abuse "meta" or lose, then yes you're completely right. Of course it sounds like a great option to be able to use a shield if you're shock infantry, or to rambo if you're cavalry. But then f**k it all and remove all other classes because right now they're useless until this mechanics abuse is fixed.
 
However or whatever it is, a peasant who was sowing his farm 10 minutes ago shouldn't be able to ride a warhorse and swing a 2h menavlion/glaive on top of it just fine.
End of discussion.
 
If "tactical" means completely breaking the balance between several classes and pretty much force players to either play by this AI abuse "meta" or lose, then yes you're completely right. Of course it sounds like a great option to be able to use a shield if you're shock infantry, or to rambo if you're cavalry. But then f**k it all and remove all other classes because right now they're useless until this mechanics abuse is fixed.
Well, this is not skirmish. It's captain mode. And only the captains can pick up weapons and cav, not the entire squad!! And there are also some disadvantages to leaving behind your squad of inf while going rambooing...I fail to se any balance breaking, with 1 inf at a time, can be able to ride a freakin horse, come on. It makes no fun at all and makes the game less tactical...
 
Back
Top Bottom