Feedback

Users who are viewing this thread

I should clarify beforehand, I'm only actually any good at playing an Archer as I play in first person. I'm really not good at the melee combat... so Multiplayer experience for me has been pretty poor. My record currently is 4 games won, 3 games lost. 47 kills and 40 deaths. The vast majority of deaths comes from being unable to select the role I want to play, as well as being unable to select a specific equipment loadout (such as a Bow).
  1. The Class system is horrific... not everyone can play any role, and yet due to Gold, you have to. There's no choice in the matter. Unless you completely dominate with your preferred role, you aren't getting it again.
  2. Some factions are terrible... bows are very overpowered currently, yet you can only ever acquire them with specific factions... Vladania has a load of crossbow classes, which mean you 100% have to land your shot, and insta-kill to stand any chance in a duel, otherwise you're toast.
  3. Siege mode is fun. The only problem I have with it is its a single-round. It should be 2 rounds, attack and defend... and the team that wins is the team that successfully defends in the quickest time. If the first team defending fails to defend, then the time-limit for their attack is restricted by the time the attacking team accomplished their task in... that way its a fair match. At the moment, defending is very stacked to ensure you maintain more kills. The only problem with defending is the spawns are terrible in some maps.
  4. For some reason the ballistas aim is off from Single-player. The projectiles respond differently, and you can't Zoom in while aiming. (I also never understood why siege weapons offered no crosshair despite bows and crossbows presenting that).
  5. "Fire" siege weapons seemingly accomplish nothing... I haven't seen any siege towers or rams catch fire... is this supposed to happen or is it just a thing that provides an extremely small damage buff per shot on siege weaponry?
  6. Shielding is also way off... If you aim at a person's legs with a bow and arrow while they're shielding with a half shield, the arrow either counts no hit, or it hits the shield... very rarely does it attribute a leg shot. Ballista and Mangonel shots should not be shielded either... it should instantly shatter the shield (Mangonel) or pierce straight through (Ballista). As the operator, you're extremely exposed, and have an extremely slow reload time. You shouldn't be penalised for good aim and calculation by a poxy shield that breaks through multiple arrow hits.
  7. Skirmishes are quite fun, but if you get a bad faction (point 2) you've lost because you can't compete as an Archer. The maps I've played on are designed very much so for cavalry. In such a small scale game-mode, I would have suspected that Cavalry were removed anyway. Its essentially like putting a player in a tank in a Call of Duty game and not expected them to dominate the land control. Faster movement, higher armour, and a hell of a lot of damage (I'm on about Cavalry, not the tank).
Suggestions
  1. Why not integrate your character level in multiplayer with the grade of equipment you can unlock? That way, you can progress through the levelling system and slowly acquire better and better weaponry or armour.
  2. Allow all factions to acquire all gear... or at least gear to the same standard as the counter-part. (I don't want to use crossbows. They're terrible imo).
  3. Suggestion is in the point
  4. The aim needs fixing and zooming should be enabled. I also dislike how you cannot actually see where your projectile went, because the ballista moves in front of the projectile, so you can't adjust accordingly.
  5. Add in the possibility of siege devices catching fire that if aren't doused by opposition players, the whole device goes up in flames.
  6. Fix hitboxes.
  7. Either remove cavalry, or add in regions of the maps that are more easily accessible to archers and infantrymen that aren't areas of control.
 
Either remove cavalry, or add in regions of the maps that are more easily accessible to archers and infantrymen that aren't areas of control.
The problem here is ironically not due to cavalry itself. If the game had Warband's class system (or something similar but not identical); then cavalry would actually be underpowered a bit on these maps. In Warband you wouldn't have access to Swadian Charger-level horses immediately(or at all if the game was balanced, and if you did get it you would have to focus 100% on getting the charger and sacrifice decent weapons/armor to get enough money). If the best horse you could get most of the time was the equivalent of a Warband Hunter, then Cavalry wouldn't be able to be such a threat to the point/s without serious and coordinated infantry support, and would die almost immediately to the mass spam of spears and throwing weapons that the game has. TaleWorlds' map designer clearly went into map design with the mindset of making the maps technically viable for all three modes of play, and they're quite well made. Unfortunately their potential is squandered.
 
sounds like you are a casual player correct?

I'm new to M&B, wouldn't really call myself a "casual player" though. I just can't play with sword and shield...

ye, you can zoom in in mp aswell

You sure? I never can on any Ballista. What key? I use shift in SP.

The problem here is ironically not due to cavalry itself. If the game had Warband's class system (or something similar but not identical); then cavalry would actually be underpowered a bit on these maps. In Warband you wouldn't have access to Swadian Charger-level horses immediately(or at all if the game was balanced, and if you did get it you would have to focus 100% on getting the charger and sacrifice decent weapons/armor to get enough money). If the best horse you could get most of the time was the equivalent of a Warband Hunter, then Cavalry wouldn't be able to be such a threat to the point/s without serious and coordinated infantry support, and would die almost immediately to the mass spam of spears and throwing weapons that the game has. TaleWorlds' map designer clearly went into map design with the mindset of making the maps technically viable for all three modes of play, and they're quite well made. Unfortunately their potential is squandered.

Agreed but why make such small maps then if they're trying to force playing all three classes? Why not simply keep large scale battles as the primary focus for the three classes, and then use these small maps with infantry only skirmishes?
 
I'm new to M&B, wouldn't really call myself a "casual player" though. I just can't play with sword and shield...



You sure? I never can on any Ballista. What key? I use shift in SP.



Agreed but why make such small maps then if they're trying to force playing all three classes? Why not simply keep large scale battles as the primary focus for the three classes, and then use these small maps with infantry only skirmishes?
Because some people like playin cav, the question is more why they make them so op
 
Back
Top Bottom