Game killer…

[JetJedi]

«Melee hits to a horse consume %40-60 of the damage now permitting some of the damage to be carried to the rider.»

I do not understand idea of this innovation, earlier was so : we knock out a horse, when we battled with less dangerous rider. Logically, interestingly and dangerously enough (rider had chance). Now: enough strongly to strike a horse (couched lance damage) and this is all, rider instantly dies, a victory...

You can tell what probably at once to strike the rider - yes, but the horse is much easier for striking (by any weapon, in fact the horse cannot parry) and if you will try to make "couched lance damage" on the rider it is possible to run into his horse...and then his friends very finely will chop you, dangerous employment IT was interesting, now it is not present, rules now such: do not think, beat a horse!

Therefore I wish to ask: WHAT FOR such innovation was required? What it really gives? In what interest?

If the idea in complication to the horseman - anything good it has not turned out, and was only lost a significant part of game. I offer alternative: minus 30 percents of life for falling from a horse.

What do you think of it?
__________________________________________________________


UPD: voting: http://forums.taleworlds.com/viewtopic.php?t=5434

 

[Khalid ibn Walid]

This has been argued at length (and with quite some heat) in the suggestions forum.

The essential purpose is to give footmen a better chance against horsemen.
Otherwise, the game would bifurcate into riders & archers, leaving wanna-be-huskarls & their ilk out of it.

I'm for a double hit, but I would agree the damage could be reduced a bit.

 

[JetJedi]

Yes, the best chance, but not same by! In any case it is normal, that the horseman is stronger than the footmen, so was always.

Nonsense of a situation that if the opponent does couched lance damage on your horse - you a corpse, and no shields will help you, a horse will not hide. It forces to strike blows ONLY on a horse.

 

[svart]

I agree this makes no sense, horses cannot parry so just hit the horse.
The way i see it, the hitboxes should have remained, and maybe if you hit the horse it would give 25% dmg to rider - and if you hit the rider 25% to the horse.
You can't expect to hit a rider with a short weapon, unless you dodge first and then hit his side/back.

 

[JetJedi]

As I already spoke, an innovation have not brought strongly appreciable chances to the footman but have transformed into full nonsense horse fights: horsemen SIMPLY knock out a horse of the contender, and all.

Yes, the horseman had very big advantage before the footman (and I think it normally so was always if only the footman has no a six-meter spear), the pedestrian needed to beat out a horse, and then also to battle the intact horseman, too much happiness for one But such innovation simply kills all game (footman use not, but horsemen against horsemen).

Reasonable alternative can be subtraction of percent of a life (maybe 40-45%) for falling from a horse, the footman will have an excellent chance to finish the wounded horseman, and it is much more logical.

What do you think of it?

 

[Volkier]

I'm against the fall-damage, likewise I'm against the joined hit-boxes. I personally don't find any difficulty disposing of horsemen on foot, but that is in a 1v1 situation or when I have my bow. So for the sake of the rest of the community which prefers to fight on foot and have a high chance of winning, I would prefer that we all thought of a suggestion which would be realistic, would not ruin the game for either horsemen, footmen or horses. :

Personally I think if horses actually behaved like horses, had more depth in them, therefore being somewhat more difficult to control, and react to pain etc. It would automatically solve a lot of problems. However, that is difficult to impliment. Therefore, I suggest that footmen speed in movement in increased is increased, 'crouch' command is added, and moves such as 'jump attack' (light or no armor only) is added in. This should actually make combat more interesting for the footmen, and remove the need to further balance them. It is pretty hard for me to argue against something I don't understand however, so sorry if I don't make sense.

I was playing a footman character for the sole purpose of testing how underpowered they are. Setup was a great lance, bow (with +3 dmg large bag of arrows) and a 2handed sword (forgot, think great warsword or something). Managed to solo 20+ dark knights by using obstacles such as hill, trees with the combination of bow. Tried the same on the open field, however now after I shot the rider, I would run around the horse and use that for cover / to stop the enemy charges. The more I killed, the more rideless horses were around me protecting me from more hits. Tried the same without the bow. Tactic was spear the horse, make it rear, then chop the rider with the 2handed. Now it would have made it infact EASIER if the horses didn't die, and I could use them for cover, but as it is now, I hit the rider, and automatically hit the horse as well, normally horse would die and I was left with using trees and bushes for cover. The only problem I observed was that I did not know when there were horses charging from behind me. Now if their sound effects (hooves and breathing) could be increased, it would make things less difficult for footmen. Overall report:

Level 32, Aerobics lvl 5, around 280 to all skills, Black armor
1 vs approx 20 dark knights - (bow + spear + sword + obsticles / hills) -win
1 vs approx 20 dark knights - (spear + sword + water) - win
1 vs approx 20 dark knights - (spear + sword + obsticles / hills) Dead after 12 kills
1 vs approx 20 dark knights - (bow + spear + sword + open field) - 2win, 1loss after 7kills)
1 vs approx 20 dark knights - (spear + sword + open field) - loss after 3 kills - pretty sure would have helped if the horses didn't die and acted as a cover

1v1 was a definate win in any case. Tried with probably every weapon.
Also tried to 'block' just before being hit, while side-stepping from the charging horse. Worked every time, and after a few minutes I have concluded I was invincible :

So any case, How about the following suggestion to help footmen?
- Increase the breathing / hooves sound of the horses so that footmen can hear the charge from behind
- Increase movement rate for footmen in terms of sidestepping, so they can 'dodge' attacks better
- Add a 'crouch' command, which would let them avoid certain attacks aimed at certain height (eg. couched lance)
- Advance the combat mechanics, allowing separate moves to be executed. (such as forward rush stabs, etc. can be creative here)

Lastly, I think this is probably the most sensible suggestion which for some reason was not thought of. - Impliment a toggle option for the % of damage that can be carried out to the horse from rider and vice versa. Between 0% and 100% :

Khalid, I ask for your oppinion on this since you seem to be my most heated compeditor on this subject. I still don't understand you though after all these what seems 'years' lol. Horsemen are meant to have an advantage no? : But then you probably don't understand me either so can we just have a 'toggle' option to remove this argument for eternity? Please Armagan? LoL

 

[Homie]

it's still quite easy to hit the rider and not the horse. You guys know that if you aim the camera upward, your sword swing will be higher right? So If a horse is running besides you, and you sing your sword parallel to the ground, you might hit the horse, but if you look up at the sky as you swing, your sword will go upward diagonaly and just hit the rider.

 

[Janus]

As for the fall damage for having your horse killed... in reality, a person wouldn't be likely to sustain any injury whatsover (other than bruises) from their horse falling over, right? It's possible to strain or break a leg that way I suppose, but not likely. I've had a horse roll halfway over on me once and it was no big deal, other than me being stuck.
Having said that, I propose this: instead of the rider taking damage from the horse falling over dead, have the rider incapacitated for a bit longer as they "struggle free" from the dead horse. That way the attacker has a longer time to get free hits in.

 

[Saber]

As for the fall damage for having your horse killed... in reality, a person wouldn't be likely to sustain any injury whatsover (other than bruises) from their horse falling over, right? It's possible to strain or break a leg that way I suppose, but not likely. I've had a horse roll halfway over on me once and it was no big deal, other than me being stuck.
Having said that, I propose this: instead of the rider taking damage from the horse falling over dead, have the rider incapacitated for a bit longer as they "struggle free" from the dead horse. That way the attacker has a longer time to get free hits in.

On the other hand if your hit with a polearm or a bolt from a heavy crossbow, during a full gallop, you could actually kill yourself if fallen from a horse.

 

[Ancientwanker]

- Increase the breathing / hooves sound of the horses so that footmen can hear the charge from behind

There were some good suggestions by Volkier above but I just wanted to single out this one as officially great. Getting rammed by the romulan cloaking horses from behind is a bit irritating.

 

[Volkier]

Janus, exactly what I have been trying to convince everyone of. It is possible to hurt yourself, but would happen very rarely. Heck you can slip and fall and break your head just as often :

I agree fully with your suggestion of riders being trapped from time to time under the horse etc. Riders could also loose a sense of direction for a while, become winded and at random times take a bit longer to recover. Maybe a VERY rare damage of a few points is fine (as often as horses getting crippled) but constant damage from falling from / with the horse? Would be insulting to players, enemies and horses ::\

 

[DaLagga]

I don't understand how you can deny the fact that many people have been seriously hurt and or killed by falling off of a horse. Especially at full gallop. Hitting the dirt at 20mph, horse or not, is going to hurt like hell, and i seriously doubt you would walk away without some injury. So if your horse is standing still and knocked down, sure...it would make sense for the actual fall to deal little damage. But at full gallop? I think 10-20 is more than fair. So perhaps something like, fall damage = a random number between 0, and horse speed x 2. So if you're cut down from a horse traveling at a speed of 6, you will take somewhere between 0 and 12 damage. And i don't think a toggle for the carry-through damage is necessary. The whole point is that hitting a horse for 50 damage should interrupt the riders attack. As a cavalry unit, if you dismount someone he is as good as dead, since no amount of infantry stand a chance against a decent mounted player. But as an infantry, if you dismount the rider you've still got a good fight on your hands, especially when he hops up in half a second at full hp.

 

[Khalid ibn Walid]

Khalid, I ask for your oppinion on this since you seem to be my most heated compeditor on this subject. I still don't understand you though after all these what seems 'years' lol. Horsemen are meant to have an advantage no? : But then you probably don't understand me either so can we just have a 'toggle' option to remove this argument for eternity? Please Armagan? LoL

Always a pleasure.

Not wishing to go over the same thing again, but keep in mind that the main point of the double-hit is to interrupt the rider's perfect swing (essential for footmen), not to hurt him per se.

I commend your DK-killing skills, but using standing live horses as shields is considerably more unrealistic than double-hitting.

I would prefer, naturally, to make horses more reactive and less easy to control than to strengthen footmen with unnatural skills. Standard footmen tricks (e.g. "stampeding" horses with a mace) could then come into play. A toggle option could be a reasonable compromise.

 

[Mage246]

First, just wanted to point out that being level 32 with full black armor is not a common setup for a footman.... For one thing you will move too slowly to be able to fight off swarms of enemy footmen, and it can be hard to afford full black and full light armor. In addition, the weapon you used to make the horse rear- a great lance, is somewhat exceptional in its length (try comparing the other thrusting polearms with great lance, they don't work as well against mounted enemies because they are much shorter, even though theoretically the lance is not designed for unmounted combat). Also, most characters that are level 32 can solo any group, probably even with throwing stones if they wanted to (would take high powerthrow and throwing skill though). Not only that, but you seem to have built your character with the optimal anti-mounted unit setup. Try beating them with lower than black armor.... I'm not saying that unmounted vs mounted is impossible (I do it all the time), just harder than the example that you give. It is much harder to start out as a footman and level up to a high level than to switch to a footman at a high level, when pretty much everything is easy. That having been said, this is not the point of my post.

I just wanted to point out something that I find very aggravating about fighting mounted units: you can be stunlocked by horses that are barely moving. Sometimes, you get knocked down by a charging horse, and the horse rears after hitting you. Then, when you get back up and try to hit the horse with a weapon, the horse starts slowly moving towards you, and somehow still manages to deal charge damage to you, hitting you 5 or 6 times with charge damage of 0 and interrupting every stroke. This just isn't realistic-- a horse that just starts moving isn't going to be able to prevent a person from swinging a weapon at them. Mounted units should not be able to escape without a scratch by abusing this, which I consider to be a bug in how charge damage works.

 

[JetJedi]

DaLagga

I think that size of a damage depending on speed and weights (somebody fell in the armor weight in 60 kg even from meter? Yes?! Not so pleasantly, right? ) is interestingly.

But in any case the present system is necessary for changing, I repeat: footman don`t use new rules against horsemen in "full force", (they have received a doubtful bonus), but horsemen use against horsemen: 1-2 impacts in a horse of the contender (they have not learned to parry, unfortunately ) and "deal in the bag", сongratulations on a victory to you! Delirium...

 

[Mage246]

I wish I understood half of what JetJedi says.... Are you usinig babelfish to translate or something?

 

[DaLagga]

Sorry JetJedi, but along with Mage, i really have a hard time understanding you, no offense. I had to read your main post 3 or 4 times to really understand it, and didn't really get your reply. I'm assuming english isn't your native language, so that being said you're better than i am since i only speak one language Please don't take this as a criticism, i'm just letting you know that i can't accurately reply to your post.

 

[g_flook]

As for the fall damage for having your horse killed... in reality, a person wouldn't be likely to sustain any injury whatsover (other than bruises) from their horse falling over, right? It's possible to strain or break a leg that way I suppose, but not likely. I've had a horse roll halfway over on me once and it was no big deal, other than me being stuck.

Chris Reeves was paralyzed from a horse. I rode a persian and it hospitalized me when it fell on me crushed my ribs and punctured my lung. Falling from a horse isnt dangerous[/quote]

 

[JetJedi]

Sorry guys, but without practice my english really bad, I shall try to explain easier

 

[Volkier]

DaLagga, I am not going to argue with you. Get a horse, fall off it, and with it, in different speeds, then you would understand why people argue. You can slip on a banana skin, fall and crack your head, probably with just as much chance. Nothing personal, I admit, a few years ago I might have thought the same thing :

Khalid, I was just stating that players need to have strategy involved if they plan to attack somebody who supposingly has an advantage. I used example of using horses as stationary objects on the field due to the current battle-system : But ultimately, you seem to agree anyways. I still can't understand why you want footmen to deal damage to the rider when the hit the horse, but I suppose thats like you said 'to make fighting easier' for the footman.

So would I be correct to say that you would happily welcome other changes which provide foot-combat with just as much, if not more efficiency, while also advancing the mounted-combat, whilst ultimately also making horses more difficult to control, and meanwhile double damage is in your view only something to balance this out? : Just checking if we are on the same frequency here. :