-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Footslogging VS Horseback
- 主题发起人 M_Rat13
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
Well, considering we are a vip and the tactical mastermind of our force, and if you don't have a horse equipped your campaign movement speed is a crawl, I'd say the most logical outcome is going to be from horse back.
Now, if it wasn't for the campaign movement speed bit, I'd consider making a foot based combatant but alas, we can't count as one of those people who are an infantry that rides a stored horse.
Now, if it wasn't for the campaign movement speed bit, I'd consider making a foot based combatant but alas, we can't count as one of those people who are an infantry that rides a stored horse.
M_Rat13
Recruit
Well considering you can dismount a horse in battle, my question more relates to fighting than travelling.
paladinx333
Sergeant at Arms
Fight on the ground like a filthy peasant? Perish the thought!
What noble in their right mind fights on foot?
I would like to fight on foot more often but it is way more difficult with the way mass combat currently works. VS bandits or disordered it can be fun but soon as you face a mob of models they insta gib your shield and then you because every single model in weapon range attacks at max speed repeatedly. That means usually 4-6 attacks every other second doing avg 50 damage on real damage- shields last thru 2 rounds of attack and are gone. The clipping and constant swings also impede your own attacks.
You can 'fight' with your men but that mostly consists of having 3 shields and 1 weapon and serving as a blocker, staying on the edge of the fight and picking off strays, using a glaive or some large two handed weapon to swing wildly over the heads of your fellows (no worries about friendly damage) or leave your horse in the back, fight dismounted vs the initial cavalry rush commanding your soldiers more precisely while being less of a target- then once most of the enemy cavalry is down, mount up and get your soldiers to advance while you skirmish out distracting the enemy and making it slightly easier for your men until the enemy breaks and you get 10-20 kills in the pursuit.
Fighting in the line for the whole battle is really impossible as more than a blocker on realistic damage. With lowered damage and 3 shields in rotation you can do it for most of a battle.
You can 'fight' with your men but that mostly consists of having 3 shields and 1 weapon and serving as a blocker, staying on the edge of the fight and picking off strays, using a glaive or some large two handed weapon to swing wildly over the heads of your fellows (no worries about friendly damage) or leave your horse in the back, fight dismounted vs the initial cavalry rush commanding your soldiers more precisely while being less of a target- then once most of the enemy cavalry is down, mount up and get your soldiers to advance while you skirmish out distracting the enemy and making it slightly easier for your men until the enemy breaks and you get 10-20 kills in the pursuit.
Fighting in the line for the whole battle is really impossible as more than a blocker on realistic damage. With lowered damage and 3 shields in rotation you can do it for most of a battle.
I ride on horse so the enemy has a handicap. God help them if they kill it and I begin actually hit them on foot. ?
Depends, if I'm roleplaying a Sturgian or a Battanian, then I'll go on foot, any of the others? Mount.
Wanted to post something simular.
Basicly I start on mount but when my force lacks cav units, the enemy has alot of scary pikes or some other reason that is unrelated (sometimes i just prefer walking abit, ok?) il dismount.
Beeing mounted can defenitly be a detriment but if you start on a mount you always have the option about how to play and it boosts your campaign speed
you can travel dismounted but have horse to give you speed on the map but still give athletics.
you really need both if you want to level up. The more activities you do, the more skills you get, meaning, more easier to reach focus points. Pigeonholing oneself to just one activity will result in fast one-dimensional growth but once you reach certain height, your growth almost stops due to exp requirements at higher proficiency levels as well as you not giving any attributes or focus to other areas. There are hard caps after all.
2 starting attibute points act as 0 actual, since theye give just 10 skill cap, 18 harcap with each attribute giving 10 more cap ceiling. So if you give 1 attribute, currently, at 3 points you will have 20 cap. Because current 2 starting attribute is really 0. If you could have 0 attribute points, your skill cap logically should be at -10.
you really need both if you want to level up. The more activities you do, the more skills you get, meaning, more easier to reach focus points. Pigeonholing oneself to just one activity will result in fast one-dimensional growth but once you reach certain height, your growth almost stops due to exp requirements at higher proficiency levels as well as you not giving any attributes or focus to other areas. There are hard caps after all.
2 starting attibute points act as 0 actual, since theye give just 10 skill cap, 18 harcap with each attribute giving 10 more cap ceiling. So if you give 1 attribute, currently, at 3 points you will have 20 cap. Because current 2 starting attribute is really 0. If you could have 0 attribute points, your skill cap logically should be at -10.
Campaign movement speed and troops recruiting are settings I've learned to just set down to the lowest settings. It the rep quests are boring, random, and monotonous and there is just this weird point in the early game where you don't have the money for 40+ horses yet, but you can catch anything you can kill with more than like 25'ish men. So heck with it I choose the low settings to remove on mechanic, and avoid an outright silly one.
Is that even a thing in Bannerlord? I've lost the same horse at least 100 times and nothing ever happened. I started using the thing as a 4 legged mantlet on open maps.
