Equality for all classes, an argument for the removal of passive combat differentials

Users who are viewing this thread

with the latest addition of passive perks i believe it is relevant to talk about what passive non-equipment differentials do to combat balance between different classes/loadout/perk choices

i have argued before that having penalties in accuracy for players using bows/crossbows(when their class isn't archer/crossbow), the speed penalties for players using horses(when their class isn't cavalry) and the penalties for archer/cavalry on foot movement reduces gameplay quality by punishing players from trying to adapt to different combat situations then their classes specialize in

but the newest addition to the trend (adding variances, in the form of passive combat percentage multipliers named "perks", that increase your melee efficiency(specifically the swing speed bonus, but there are other perks that give a variety of bonus's irrelevant to the traditional physics based combat nature of the mount and blade series such as 100% bonus to cavalry, or 5% bonus foot speed and other perks not just limited to the infantry class)) make infantry's ability to melee advantageous over other pre-made classes

now all three sectors of combat: cavalry, archer, and infantry play is divided only amongst players in their relative classes in terms of equality

so no longer will players be able to combat efficiently outside the class they choose (before the addition of infantry melee specialization perks all combat; outside of being outnumbered by multiple opponents which an archer or cavalry player would lose due to the penalties those classes have in foot movement speed (this foot movement speed penalty has always been infantry's inherent advantageous in foot combat), all classes would have a fair opportunity to melee)

so if your an infantryman and need to play against an archer or a cavalryman (with their corresponding equipment) and your opponent is the exact same skill level as you(or lower in some cases) you will lose based on the penalties you face by using the weapons or equipment(horses) not native to your infantry class

i believe this is wrong

i believe that you should only lose in situations where your skill level is lower then your opponents(or make a mistake) and not because of penalties against your class in situations where you have to adapt and use weapons outside your class's equipment selection ability(such as bows and mounts)

not picking the right class for a situation (like choosing a 2 handed class without a shield in an open plain battle where you would be shot by archers or horse archers) and dying is fine because planning and choosing the right class for a situation is also a skill that can be learned and changed

but having situations where you are unable to defend yourself fairly due to a game mechanic is frustrating (such as crush-throughs where even if you blocked in the right direction you wouldn't be able to block some strikes) and by eliminating all of these differences in passive abilities players will have the best chance at survival which would enhance their experience of the game

without these passive ability enhancements players wouldn't encounter counter-intuitive situations such as:

an heavily armored cavalry outrunning a lightly unarmored horse (mounted by an infantry/archer class)

an heavily armored infantry outrunning a lightly armored archer/dismounted cavalryman(movement penalties could be attached to the archer's bow and quiver instead of the class so they they could not kite but at the same time be able to drop the equipment and run effectively)

a player with better accuracy (infantry/cavalry using a bow/crossbow) losing to an archer/crossbowman

a player with better melee skills (archer/cavalry) losing to an infantryman(with the perk to swing faster or do more damage etc)

with the removal of all these unnecessary penalties and passive ability enhancers i believe the game-play would improve for all

thank you for reading
 
Top Bottom