Sergeant at Arms
Here's an angry rant about how I don't like what you're doing.
Now why won't you hang out with me?
Now why won't you hang out with me?
Unfortunately the system needs fixing too - even in the hands of a player who knows how to use a spear properly unlike the AI, spears are still very very statistically underwhelming; they attack very slowly, have only one attack direction, do only mediocre damage at optimal range, and do terrible damage at close range.there's the key, the AI needs fixing, not necessarily the system.
I agree, though I also think that an expert archer with a longbow taking 7-8 body shots to kill someone in high-quality mail or lamellar is not too unrealistic, and much better than the current 4-5.Arrows simply cannot pierce plate armor, and would still have a massive difficulty piercing mail with gambeson. So any well equipped army should basically nullify the effectiveness of ranged weapons, yet it's quite the contrary in BL.
I have absolutely no problem destroying cavalry with only a spear in hand. The only thing that's problematic is the über-effect of horse charges (horse should be more skittish of running through pointy metal (call it realism), plus the push aside effect's also way too strong, I see what they did try to accomplish (it was usual to get stuck in crowds in Warband, and it was quite ridiculous/unrealistic) but they've over-done it. Enemy characters should not be able to push asside troops, but it happens.Unfortunately the system needs fixing too - even in the hands of a player who knows how to use a spear properly unlike the AI, spears are still very very statistically underwhelming; they attack very slowly, have only one attack direction, do only mediocre damage at optimal range, and do terrible damage at close range.
Compared to something like two-handers which in exchange for slightly less range, do a ****load more damage and attack way faster in multiple directions.
Or especially glaives, which have every possible advantage - long range, 1h/2h, usable on horseback, enormous damage, enormously high swing speed, attack from multiple directions.
Spears and pikes need AI fixes but also statistical buffs, which is why it isn't a bad thing for pierce damage against armour to be nerfed because either way spears' base damage and/or speed has to be buffed.
I agree, though I also think that an expert archer with a longbow taking 7-8 body shots to kill someone in high-quality mail or lamellar is not too unrealistic, and much better than the current 4-5.
I have done many playthrough using spears and you are correct, that if you perk correctly and play correctly you can make spears work. But that's just it you have to make them work. You have no such problem with the other weapons, they simply work out of the box.you'll kill anything quite fast with headshots, you simply must understand that using long spears for melee infantry close range fights' just dumb, that's the reason why short spears existed, even historically.
There was no previous version to compare to and things that were left out and we had them before. Although vanilla M&B was lacking in some important ways, like the strategy AI, which got improved in Warband.
This can't be over-stated ever. Those lines didn't become signature meme lines for no reason.* Voiced Greetings: We are finding a terrible Arnold Schwarzenegger impersonator to voice Sea Raider greeting lines!
Oh bless his heart, he has never played Halo.You haven´t been in a toxic forum yet or?
try playing the game with reasonable balancing mods that actually make armors a little more logical, and reduces overall HP and you'll understand that the problem isn't the spears, they can do with a bit of handling and speed buff (like 5 more for each) but other than that there's nothing to mess them with. We could also use a wider array of spears, Viking Conquest in Warband had some of the best designs for it because Brytenwalda team (guy's who made it) are history buffs and always shot their designs leaning more towards realism. Basically going to a major battle with sword's just stupid, those were expensive and inneffective against almost everything in a battlefield. They were the "pistols" backup weapons of the middle ages, not the "rifles", the "!rifles" were polearms, axes and maces, in that order. Than we had bows which were tactical harass weapons at distance, and killers at mid-range distance against non-fully covered armor. The whole "shooting the sky" is a hollywood fantasy, it was only used a few times in history by a few tacticians but the main goal was demoralizing the opponent, actually killing them doing that was nearly impossible. The only other long range use of bows and crossbows was shooting down, that was golden, if you had a good position you'd rain arrows. (Battle of Agincourt, Castle Garrison, etc) - I'm getting annoyed to have to explain that xD I'll just link a videoI have done many playthrough using spears and you are correct, that if you perk correctly and play correctly you can make spears work. But that's just it you have to make them work. You have no such problem with the other weapons, they simply work out of the box.
There is nothing stopping you from hitting a character in the head with a 2hander and overkilling your target you simply dont have to.
You can also stab with swords just as you can short spears. A shorter spear is what 180 at the high end and 140 at the low end (outside javelins)
Im not even sure if a weapons reach is counted from grip to tip, or it is just the length of the weapon - in the latter case the spears lose a third of their length anyway.
If taking a short spear over a sword, in what situations is that extra ~20-40 weapon length reaping dividends over the ability to swing your weapon in 3 extra direction each of which have a suprior damage hit box for the messy mob fighting that is bannerlord infantry combat.
Which comes to in my opinion the biggest stat weaknesses of spears - their handling. This meassure the size and there fore duration of the damaging and peak damage windows during a swing or thrust.
If you sweet spot it spears can do damage equal to other weapons its just harder because they have ~25 less handling. The two hander and one hander perk trees have ways to increase their handling further multiplying their higher base values. Both one hander and 2 hander skills give better scaling per skill point than the pole arm tree putting thrusting spears further behind.
2hander swords are just a better thrusting weapon than a spear.
Relating to long spears + pikes and their supposed or ideal effectivenes against cavalry it is a at this moment a more academic than practical question. As it currently stands cavalry seem to be completely inaffective. I can have 20 tier 4 cav charge full speed into an equal number of spread out looters and they will leave with 1-2 kills. They just dont hit anything, or they dont do enough damge to kill and by the time they get their second charge off the infantry melee will already be decided because they take less than 1 minute
The most cavalry do is their minor CC disruptions when they charge / collide with you.
They rarely even hit me though, I'll get run through by about 6 horses if im caught out of position before one of them even clips me with their weapon. This CC can be anouying as a player because loss of control always is. Plus the outsized effect we as the player have on the tide of battle means any down time for us can be dangerous given how random the outcome of relatively even fights can be.
If you are talking about outright killing riders then two handers are also just as, if not more effetive because of their higher handling and base damage, multiplied by the speed bonus provided by the rider charging you. Most Cav dont have spears long enough that you cant stab the head of their horse with a two handed sword before they can touch you . the window just feels scarier because you have to let the horses get closer to you than with a spear.
So in a completely different game that isnt the one I'm talking about spears arent a problem? Nice.try playing the game with reasonable balancing mods that actually make armors a little more logical, and reduces overall HP and you'll understand that the problem isn't the spears
oh damn, you want me to link 50 videos, 20 on the subject alone + 30 on historical technology, advancements and functionality of armor?So in a completely different game that isnt the one I'm talking about spears arent a problem? Nice.
Appart from that salient point. The armour in the video you presented is a single peice cuirass which isnt present in banerlord nore the periods that loosely inspires it. But dont worry I have seen the litany of other videos showing armour effectiveness everytime these realism discussions are rehashed.
I'm all for bannerlord to be inspired by or reflect real life, but first and foremost I want it to be a fun game. It's not realistic that I can't suplex a man but this is a game with limitations. Certain realisms can't be mapped by this game. So to religiously persue the select realisms that you can implement just leads to bad game design. and something that doesnt really reflect real combat anyway.
I think archers could use a nerf but that's just because I want unit tactics to not be one dimentional. I still think they should be a fun class to play with a lethal role beyond just harassment.
My opinions on the relative strength of spears in this game still stands.
Anyway we are off topic. I'm just here waiting for a patch ahah..
Yes. The hammier, the better!This can't be over-stated ever. Those lines didn't become signature meme lines for no reason.
Can I ask, how many chest shots do you think a T5 archer should take to kill a T5 armoured melee unit wearing mail-over-gambeson or lamellar at a 30 metre distance?oh damn, you want me to link 50 videos, 20 on the subject alone + 30 on historical technology, advancements and functionality of armor?
as for the balancing, no, it isn't a different game, eventually TW will be much closer to the mod I just shared to you than what it currently is in-game. Believe me, WB plate armor was a beast, there's a reason why we all meme about the coat of plates on swadian horses, in BL without proper balancing you are basically 1hk by looters with rocks and scicles wearing full Cataphract gear...
I won´t ever call TWs (as a whole) communication good. Do you know an estimated date when the deflection bug will be fixed? I don´t after 4+ weeks. Or what the next update will bring (Banners? Claimants? Major improvements to X? Armor changes because of "OP" archers? Whatever? Even 8k sheep texture)? I don´t...because see my signature.But communication the last 4 months have been pretty great as well, last month excluded (holidays & Duh's leave of absence).
Duh and other dev's have been posting tons in these last months.
To me the only way of balancing it properly would be to make it depend on bow draw weight. To make it simpler for both balance and simulation ("realistic") contexts:Yes. The hammier, the better!
Can I ask, how many chest shots do you think a T5 archer should take to kill a T5 armoured melee unit wearing mail-over-gambeson or lamellar at a 30 metre distance?
Bearing in mind that the current amount of shots is 4-5, and in Warband it was 7-9.
For the sake of simplicity of not having to rework the AI arrow targeting system, the hitboxes, and simulate many tiny little gaps on thousands of troop models at once, could direct hits to the body not be generalised/abstracted?To me the only way of balancing it properly would be to make it depend on bow draw weight. To make it simpler for both balance and simulation ("realistic") contexts:
Short Bows: no dmg
Short Composites: Low Dmg as in 0 to 2 - with possibility of critial (simulating gaps between plates) which would do normal dmg
Longbows: enough to cause hit-stun - with possibility of critial (simulating gaps between plates) which would do high dmg
-- basically fast shooting bows should do almost nothing against it, while the heavy draw bows should give punch knocks, but not be able to kill with less than a gazillion shots --
Since I believe the game already provides us with material recognition, for the non plate mats if you hit gaps than you do massive dmg with the heavier bows, medium dmg with composites and low dmg with short bows if the gap is a mail.
Applying this to the game would signify a need to review the archer troops and the use of archer troops by the AI (earlier withdraws when skirmishing and putting bows away when being charged). To balance players, forbid the use of heavy draw bows when using full plate on the hand slot (you need your hands fine movements to do it), and bump up it's dmg against gambeson, mail and leather to at least 2/3rds of the enemy HP per shot on average.
Unfortunately game was done with, again, a heavy bias towards bows, I believe a lot of ppl would get pissed at it, but it would improve the strategic level while also making the game more close to reality.
I still stick to my opinion, the actual plates should basically make you immune, the gaps should grant dmg, and shots towards the neck always do full dmg. Shots to arms and legs with the heavier bows should do more dmg, but not enough to kill under 10 hits
EDIT: Oh yeah, provided that we get material recognition and not just hitboxes, it's golden that way, if not, bows should be given a chance to do critical simulating gap shots.
the problem there is that it fails to simulate properly, if you go on flat numbers that's gonna turn the armored unit into a attrition score, because if by each hit that takes a chunk, it'll make it easier for the unit to die, whereas if there's luck or, preferrably, skill involved, you can do serious damage at once, but only you / the special unit that pulled that off. That means you can create a tactical choice to hunt down specialty units that can pull such a thing off with high odds.For the sake of simplicity of not having to rework the AI arrow targeting system, the hitboxes, and simulate many tiny little gaps on thousands of troop models at once, could direct hits to the body not be generalised/abstracted?
I'll explain what I mean: your system would call for, say, 10% of hittable space on armour to have tiny "gap" hitboxes that do 99 damage, and hitting on the rest of the body armour would do 1 damage. If accuracy for hitting the gap was around 10% then it would take 10 hits on average for a T4 archer to kill a man in T5 armour.
Whereas I would simply keep the existing system, increase armor's protection against pierce damage, and make hitting on the body do only 10 damage, so it would take 10 hits on average for a T4 archer to kill a man in T5 armour. We would simply pretend that in 10 shots, 9 had done little damage and 1 had hit a gap and done massive damage. You wouldn't be able to tell the difference at a distance.
So in the end both your system and TW's existing system with modified armour pierce damage absorption values would have the same functional outcome if you weren't looking too closely at the corpse of every troop that gets shot; but using the existing system would be less work. And I don't expect TW would even be willing to rework everything at this point.
Arrows simply cannot pierce plate armor, and would still have a massive difficulty piercing mail with gambeson. So any well equipped army should basically nullify the effectiveness of ranged weapons, yet it's quite the contrary in BL.
It can because with RBM mod, this is how you make a significant damage to highest tier units in game and eventually kill them while when shot in torso, they take 1 or 2 damage.A men-at-arms in plate armor shot through the arm or leg would be out of combat or greatly reduced in his effectiveness. BL cannot simulate this.