If no nerfs for Fians or Khan's Guard then..

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
LDominating

LDominating

Regular
If you won't nerf the Khans or the Fians that's fine but atleast buff the other troops to make them usefull and not be replaced by doomstacks of Fians or Khans.

I think @LyonExodus gave a good detailed video about why the game's poorly designed around manual battles,both in terms of stats and equipment,especially equipment
If an equipment slot is not mentioned/skipped it's not removed,it's kept as it is,I'll add just the changes,skipping the already existing stuff.
Do keep in mind if there's more than 1 template,the troop can choose the weapon from 1st template and armour from 2nd,the templates aren't set in stone and only expands the pool of items a troop has.
I'm sorry if I made a mistake along the way.

I'd suggest right now for noble troops these changes:
Sturgia,Druzhinik and their line:

T2 replaces with the Nasalhelm over Leather (23) in addition to getting Galloglaich Axe as an option
Here's the templates with stats

T3 replaces with Nasal Helmet with Mail (39),Mail Shoulder Guards(11),which I think should be reverted to their original 18 Body Armour,Mail Mittens (20) and Simple Leather Boots (6) aswell as getting a Pointy Warsword option
Here's the templates

T4 gets the Mail Shoulder Guards (11 body armour) and get the Veteran Warrior's Axe in addition to their normal Long Warsword and we replace their Mail Shirt with Decorated Huberk(32 15 15) aswell with Bronze Bracers (22)
Here's the 2 templates

T5 replaces with the Fullered Long Warsword & Rectangular Bitted Axe in addition to a Plated Warlord Helmet (53)
Here's the 2 templates

T6 gets the same weapons with a new upgrade to the spear,having the Heavy Druzhinik Lance,the Bronze Bracers (22) for hand slot and Strapped Mail Chauses(23) for legs.
Here's the 2 templates

Empire,Cataphract line:

T2 replaces with the Legionary Helmet (36),Auxiliary Armour with Straps (18 8 4) & Auxiliary Armour (17 8 4),Legionary Padded Straps (9 4) and Simple Commoner Spear.
Here's the templates 2

T3 only gets the Template 3 removed,always having the shoulders.

T4 gets a new shoulder Decorated Leather Harness over Mail (16 10),replaces with Fine Steel Paramerion and Courser Lance,in addition to a new helmet Iron Nasalhelm over Leather(43) and replaces with Splint Boots (22)
Here's the 4 templates

T5 replaces with the Themaskene Steel Spathion & Cataphract Mace and the Knight's Kite Shield with the Cataphract Lance aswell as 3 new shoulders Neckguard with Bronze Plate Pauldrons (14 7) Decorated Leather Harness over Mail (16 10) & Legionary Cape (16 4) aswell as hand armour Decorated Imperial Gauntlets (20).
Here's the 3 templates:

T6 replaces with the Themaskene Steel Sphathion & Cataphracts Mace,replaces with Lamellar Plate Boots (19) and Lamellar Plate Gauntlets (23)
Here's the 2 templates:

Aserai,Faris Line:

T2 replaces with 3 new shields Desert Round Shield,Curved Round Shield & Reinforced Desert Round Shield,they get 3 new saddles Beduin Common Saddle (12),Rugged Beduin Saddle (12)& Beduin Cloth Saddle (9),they replace with the Long Thamaskene Tipped Spear and get a set of Horseman Javelins
Here's the 3 templates

T3 replaces with the Helmet with Open Turban (26) Heavy Ring Mail (20 10 :cool: Studded Leather Vambraces (11),they get an additional shield,Large Adarga plus the other 4 shields,they replace with the Fine Steel Leaf Spear and Slighty Ridged Flyssa & Heavy Horseman's Mace.
Here's the 4 templates

T4 replaces with Bamboo Axe & Fine Steel Long Kaskara,Mamluke Lance and Jereed,they replace with the Luxury Scale Armour (47 23 14),Splint Vambraces (20),Splint Boots (22), Rough Cavalry Saddle,Desert Oval Shield & Wooden Oval Shield
Here's the 2 templates

T5 replaces with Lordly Seel Cap (46) & Sultan's Crowned Lord Helmet(45),Scale Shoulder Guards(14 7),Luxury Scale Armour (47 23 14),Splint Vambraces (20),Splint Boots (22),Reinforced Half Plate Barding,Decorated Oval Shield,Jereed,Noble Cavalry Lance and Engraved Angular Kaskara.
Here's the 2 templates

T6 replaces with Sultan's Steel Cap (46),Mastercrafted Southern Scale over Chain Hauberk (51 25 16) & Mastercrafted Southern Scale over Chain Mail (51 16 16),Long Sleeved Bronze Scale Shoulder Guards (16 :cool: & Bronze Scale Shoulder Guard (14 4),Plated Striped Gauntlets(22),Splint Boots (22),Reinforced Half Plate Barding,Decorated Oval Shield,Jereed,Noble Cavalry Lance and Engraved Angular Kaskara.
Here's the 2 templates

Vlandia,Knight Line:
T2 gets Laced Coif (14) & Open Padded coif (14),Hood (3),replaces with Heavy Heavy Aketon (18 9 9) and Light Lance.
Here's the 3 templates

T3 gets Ornate Pauldrons (8 :cool: & Pauldrons with Cape (8 :cool:,a new weapon Spiked Battle Axe,Mail Cavalier Boots (12),Half Mail Barding (55).
Here's the 2 templates

T4 gets Heavy Mail Hauberk,Oranate Pauldrons with Cape (15 12) & Reinforced Mail Shoulders (15 4),replaces with Knight Helmet with Bronze Faceguard (44) & Closed Knight Helmet (45),with Reinforced Mail Mittens (23),Mail Chauses (22),Fortified Kite Shield,Chain Mail Horse Armour (55).
Here's the 3 templates

T5 replaces with Full Helm over Padded Cloth (4:cool: & Full Helm over Padded Cloth (4:cool: --- yes there are 2 of the same name with 0.6 weight difference ---,White Tabard over Mail Hauberk (34 12 12) & Red Tabard over Mail Hauberk (34 12 12),replaces only Spiked Battle Axe with Wide Fullered Broad Arming Sword & with Heavy Knight Lance,Reinforced Mail Mittens (23),Heavy Heater Shieldand and gets the Reinforced Ornate Pauldrons (20 12) & Reinforced Ornate Pauldrons over Scale (22 12).
Here's the 3 templates

T6 has the same weapons as T5,except no more Knightly Arming Sword,replaces with Bringandine Over Mail(50 16 14,Heavy Mail Mittens (24) and gets Reinforced Ornate Pauldrons (20 12).
Here's the 2 templates

It took me a while to make this thread and I hope these would be changes would satisfy the community wants.
 
They need to fix sturgia first. Not being able to counter any archery armies or cavalry armies makes them utterly useless
 
There are lots of weapons&armor in the game "database" that are not used at all. It seams like that guy responsible for troop armament does not know about them. Send him a "kind reminder" email 🤔
 
You're definitely right. If they nerf Fians they have to buff other units. The real problem is the futility of melee/couch cavalry(even though 1.9.0 helped a bit). So factions that have cavalry as their noble units are almost a waste (Sturgia & Vlandia). The only reason Elite Cataphracts are the best melee cavalry(I'm counting Khan's Guard as horse archers so they are different) is cause they have high armor and they survive longer. Cavalry in general needs armor buffs to be relevant otherwise you have to constantly micro-manage them. It's gotten to the point where I don't even bother recruiting cavalry anymore I just stick with archers and infantry. It's more efficient.
 
I have a feeling they're going to be addressing unit parity in upcoming patches. For example Vlandia got new armor pieces but none of their units use the new armor pieces. Buff Sergeants or Banner Knights with the new shoulder armor pieces.
 
you want to nerf the only thing the already weak battanians have going for them? they'll be ran over in no time.

you need to look at the whole pizza not just the olive.
 
Halvdan said:
They need to fix sturgia first. Not being able to counter any archery armies or cavalry armies makes them utterly useless
Click to expand...
they need polearms to do that, and for polearms to be effective against cav they must be swingable until TW fixes spears and lances (and oddly enough sturgians have zero pikes). That's why sturgia's bad - there are plenty of ways of improving sturgians without changing their loadout, but that requires fixing the entirety of the AI mostly.
Another suggestion I've insisted upon was changing their noble units into infantry - it would go lengths on it's own.
Than we get the auto-resolve bias towards cavalry, which can be mitigated for sturgians through cultural feats - or fixed by making a better algorithm that more accurately mimics the results of field battles.

Lastly, Sturgians suffer from a serious identity crisis, that because they are supposed to be the future split between WB's Vaegir and Nords - one being the archer faction and the other the infantry faction - all the while Vaegir had also mediocre horse archers among their ranks - I think TW tried too hard to not turn them into a jack of all trades and we ended up with the weakest culture in the game...

The logical way of fixing it would be to give them branching noble units that split into more vaegir like archers and more nord like heavy infantry - instead they've given us mounted infantry of which the AI never uses appropriately, and we players tend to simply ignore (the dismount command I mean) - and if they give us branching nobles Sturgia would end up becoming very OP. - It was among the strongest comboes in Warband after all (vaegir archers + nord huscarls) - the more unorthodox method could be kickstarting the cultural split in-game and divide their lands to give 2 different noble units - than again I'm not sure if that would workout well for the A
Something like from Tyal up to Balgard vaegir units - archers / meant to counter-act the heavy use of HA from Khuzaits and to the west huscarl style units (Omor / Varcheg / Revyl and respective locational castles) meant to counter-act the heavy use of longbow archers from Battania and cavalry from Vlandia. The funny thing, though, is that this split/mix can already be observed through their cultural gear
 
Last edited:
xdj1nn said:
they need polearms to do that, and for polearms to be effective against cav they must be swingable until TW fixes spears and lances (and oddly enough sturgians have zero pikes). That's why sturgia's bad - there are plenty of ways of improving sturgians without changing their loadout, but that requires fixing the entirety of the AI mostly.
Another suggestion I've insisted upon was changing their noble units into infantry - it would go lengths on it's own.
Than we get the auto-resolve bias towards cavalry, which can be mitigated for sturgians through cultural feats - or fixed by making a better algorithm that more accurately mimics the results of field battles.

Lastly, Sturgians suffer from a serious identity crisis, that because they are supposed to be the future split between WB's Vaegir and Nords - one being the archer faction and the other the infantry faction - all the while Vaegir had also mediocre horse archers among their ranks - I think TW tried too hard to not turn them into a jack of all trades and we ended up with the weakest culture in the game...

The logical way of fixing it would be to give them branching noble units that split into more vaegir like archers and more nord like heavy infantry - instead they've given us mounted infantry of which the AI never uses appropriately, and we players tend to simply ignore (the dismount command I mean) - and if they give us branching nobles Sturgia would end up becoming very OP. - It was among the strongest comboes in Warband after all (vaegir archers + nord huscarls) - the more unorthodox method could be kickstarting the cultural split in-game and divide their lands to give 2 different noble units - than again I'm not sure if that would workout well for the A
Something like from Tyal up to Balgard vaegir units - archers / meant to counter-act the heavy use of HA from Khuzaits and to the west huscarl style units (Omor / Varcheg / Revyl and respective locational castles) meant to counter-act the heavy use of longbow archers from Battania and cavalry from Vlandia. The funny thing, though, is that this split/mix can already be observed through their cultural gear
Click to expand...
The sturgion we're supposed to be the heavy melee mercenaries for the army. Yet they don't have the best heavy infantry in the game. That's just ironic. Even their base level characters don't make decent infantry compared to many other cultures. It's like they went out of their way to Nerf this culture before all the others. Some of their latter troops have strengths but they're tactically useless. There are archers or garbage.
 
Halvdan said:
The sturgion we're supposed to be the heavy melee mercenaries for the army. Yet they don't have the best heavy infantry in the game. That's just ironic. Even their base level characters don't make decent infantry compared to many other cultures. It's like they went out of their way to Nerf this culture before all the others. Some of their latter troops have strengths but they're tactically useless. There are archers or garbage.
Click to expand...
the only noticeable bias' actually them not having the specialized t6 infantry of the game (which currently doesn't exist) - yet their t6 cav does very well when blended in with their base infantry (heavy axe + heavy spear + line breaker) - if you dismount them and manually transfer to inf that is.
And I haven't yet tested but I believe it's the same for their archers if they work similarly to the Nords in Warband (there i'd always assign Nord Archer troops into infantry and let them go in the mix - it was always very effective)

It is a very odd thing to think of it because when I finally sit down to test these units blended into inf, I think I'll end up with a sturgian army of pure infantry divided into 2 units during battles (for maneuvering). - Their horse raiders are okay as mounted skirmshers, but I don't see them as a good choice considering how badly AI behaves as mounted jav skirmishers (requires too much micro-management) - maybe delete archer unit default inf as the inf+arch - at the beginning of battles dismount everyone and transfer into inf than separate them into 2 identical units? Could work - just a tip, though, when using these mixed formations you must keep them at spread 90% of the time, and shieldwall when engaging into melee - there's a little micro-management but nothing too bad.

Right, i'm decided, before I install RBM back I'll try this weird idea and let you know.
 
Giving buffs to all other units just for do not nerf two units which are clearly OP? Why?

Making all elite units as OP as Fian and Khan’s Guard, just going to make the game easier for the player, less challenging, and boring.

I do not want to steamroll the AI after getting 40-50 elite units.
 
I would start with this -

  • Thrusting polearm speed buffs
  • Swinging polearm damage/handling nerfs
  • Give each noble cav a serious and unique weapon.
  • Balance total damage (#of arrows x damage per) output in T5 and T6 archers
At the end of the day, if Khan's Guards can't be defeated IN MELEE by MELEE CAV of equivalent tier, you have failed at balance. Like it is basically the job of some units to deal with horse archers, but if they lose at their own job to horse archers who do the same thing better...
At the end of the day, also, if T6 Archer units are dramatically better than T5, while T6 Cav are only somewhat better than T5 Cav, again...

Getting a more armored Vlandian vanguard as your noble unit is not very exciting. The damage output of archer nobles is huge on top of way more survivability and superior melee weaponry compared to non-noble, while all noble cav generally get is more survivability.
 
anoddhermit said:
I would start with this -

  • Thrusting polearm speed buffs
  • Swinging polearm damage/handling nerfs
  • Give each noble cav a serious and unique weapon.
  • Balance total damage (#of arrows x damage per) output in T5 and T6 archers
At the end of the day, if Khan's Guards can't be defeated IN MELEE by MELEE CAV of equivalent tier, you have failed at balance. Like it is basically the job of some units to deal with horse archers, but if they lose at their own job to horse archers who do the same thing better...
At the end of the day, also, if T6 Archer units are dramatically better than T5, while T6 Cav are only somewhat better than T5 Cav, again...

Getting a more armored Vlandian vanguard as your noble unit is not very exciting. The damage output of archer nobles is huge on top of way more survivability and superior melee weaponry compared to non-noble, while all noble cav generally get is more survivability.
Click to expand...
100%, looks like they did tweak the polearm thrust recently so it's a bit better than before but still needs to get it to a point where it's 'balanceable' with the other conventional weapons.
KG can be 'OP' but it has to be comparable with other T6 units and what their own functions/specialties are - if they don't want to nerf their battle capabilities for some reason (assume it was to give Khuzait/Battanians that 'unique' troop characteristic); modify their cost wage so it makes sense.

I would think, pitching 100% of any unit type against another unit type (but keeping their wage total equivalent), there should only be something like a 25% deviation in the outcomes. That way, yes, stacking KG or Cataphracts should completely be OP but offseted by their cost for players. Whereas, a more 'mixed' composition of a party would be equalized where it allows the player to 'game' what they think the best meta is against a certain faction; but also keeping the AI templates relevant in most situations.
 
JunKeteer said:
100%, looks like they did tweak the polearm thrust recently so it's a bit better than before but still needs to get it to a point where it's 'balanceable' with the other conventional weapons.
KG can be 'OP' but it has to be comparable with other T6 units and what their own functions/specialties are - if they don't want to nerf their battle capabilities for some reason (assume it was to give Khuzait/Battanians that 'unique' troop characteristic); modify their cost wage so it makes sense.

I would think, pitching 100% of any unit type against another unit type (but keeping their wage total equivalent), there should only be something like a 25% deviation in the outcomes. That way, yes, stacking KG or Cataphracts should completely be OP but offseted by their cost for players. Whereas, a more 'mixed' composition of a party would be equalized where it allows the player to 'game' what they think the best meta is against a certain faction; but also keeping the AI templates relevant in most situations.
Click to expand...

Well, I think the deviation can be high if there's a legit reason to bring specialist units to the battlefield, but there isn't for the pikeman. Putting shield infantry in square formation is just better. Pikes don't seem to work well in square formation either so you can't combo them well with it. They are basically specifically for dealing with cav charges, but they're not even worth using for their singular purpose over other options.

Like if I'm bringing a good % of my infantry as pikemen, they better be pulling a lot of weight against cav charges considering how vulnerable they are to archers and other infantry.

As for cost offset for the player for noble units.... I think because it's more expensive to replace units than pay their wages, and because winning battles gets you way more loot and thus more money to pay wages, and because elite units tend to die less, and because archer units die less than infantry and cav.......... there's no way to balance this unless the cost in wages is way, way higher than it currently is. Like they could cost 5-10x the wage and doomstacking them would still be a good option for your main party. And even playing without intentionally stacking, over time if you simply keep the most effective units via prisoners and so on and integrate them into your army, you can still end up with a doomstack just sort of by doing whatever you find works.


Some players can do extremely well with lesser units using more complex strategies or just cheesing the AI, but it's not that much cheaper plus that can be time and/or micromanagement intensive.
 
Or you could also limit the number of T6 units you can use depending on perks or clan tier or why not both?
I mean, as far as i can tell simply rearranging the skills and tweaking the DMG output is enough. the Khans don't need to be massively nerfed, just rebalance them so they are not going to be the best troops at anything they attempt to do.

The thing is that the troop itself is just a design problem. They overclass any unit of their own faction.
What's the point of the Lancers when you can get a better performance out of half the number of troops in Khans by telling them to hold fire? What's the point of the Horse Archer when the Khan's are simply better?
What's the point of the Marksman when the Khan's are clearly better?
What's the point of the Darkhan when the Khan's are clearly better? Who cares about the shield when they can kill that fast
What's in the mind of who designed it and hasn't figure out of broken it is yet? And does the designer realize anything that is written above?


Don't know about you but as the Khan's are right now they are a prime example of "How to not design a troop"
Anybody that says otherwise has no idea of how to make a balanced game.

The Khuzait don't even have a bad rooster, and yet they have the single most versatile and overpowered unit in the game.
With path 1.9. the Heavy Lancers performance is around 10 times better than it was in 1.8. so as far as i can tell you the Khuzait right now are the best faction in the game and it's not even close.
Darkhans are average infantrymen
Marksman are the best T5 archer
Lancers are the best standard cavalry
Heavy Horse Archers are the best T5 Horse Archers
Is there really the need for the Khan's to still be that good?

Anyway, you all likely know my opinion on the troop already from the analysis i did a few weeks ago.
 
Dabos37 said:
Giving buffs to all other units just for do not nerf two units which are clearly OP? Why?

Making all elite units as OP as Fian and Khan’s Guard, just going to make the game easier for the player, less challenging, and boring.

I do not want to steamroll the AI after getting 40-50 elite units.
Click to expand...
Because it's better - There's a reason why Game Designing is a profession, not everyone is capable of picturing changes without trial and error... There's absolutely no explanation I can give you that will satisfy or you can fully understand if you're asking that question... Usually more experienced players know that from sheer experience.

In a number games leveling with the bottom as reference means removal - inherently making the game less fun and units stand out less. - if instead you increase everyone to the same level each with it's own caveat, you increase the fun factor and make all of the choices unique. By nerfing you get a duller experience with a bland homogeneity - it's objectively better to get uniqueness and flush each to shine....

But in this case the major issue lies with defects on their combat system rather than troops being objectively OP - I'm going to insist that to properly evaluate this subject they must first fix the issues, specially the AI... Nerfing them now would be a band-aid that they will have to change later again no matter what - waste of time and resources...

anoddhermit said:
I would start with this -

  • Thrusting polearm speed buffs
  • Swinging polearm damage/handling nerfs
  • Give each noble cav a serious and unique weapon.
  • Balance total damage (#of arrows x damage per) output in T5 and T6 archers
At the end of the day, if Khan's Guards can't be defeated IN MELEE by MELEE CAV of equivalent tier, you have failed at balance. Like it is basically the job of some units to deal with horse archers, but if they lose at their own job to horse archers who do the same thing better...
At the end of the day, also, if T6 Archer units are dramatically better than T5, while T6 Cav are only somewhat better than T5 Cav, again...

Getting a more armored Vlandian vanguard as your noble unit is not very exciting. The damage output of archer nobles is huge on top of way more survivability and superior melee weaponry compared to non-noble, while all noble cav generally get is more survivability.
Click to expand...
pointless unless you want them to not change the AI at all... They must first fix the AI than we see...
 
xdj1nn said:
pointless unless you want them to not change the AI at all... They must first fix the AI than we see...
Click to expand...

Presumably some aspects of the AI aren't going to be fixed for awhile at this point, if ever, so working with the AI they have / bandaid fixes is what I'm assuming they'll do to fix up balance post-release. The first two changes would also make the player less absurdly powerful with a swinging polearm. I like using them but sometimes something fun is so powerful it kind of ruins it because it feels too much like cheesing.
 
Give Cataphracts Bows too please, ty. Looking forward to Samurai DLC with noble samurai HA wielding naginata. Also, you already got the Elephant model, you got the ballista : Elephant ballista!
 
xdj1nn said:
Because it's better - There's a reason why Game Designing is a profession, not everyone is capable of picturing changes without trial and error... There's absolutely no explanation I can give you that will satisfy or you can fully understand if you're asking that question... Usually more experienced players know that from sheer experience.

In a number games leveling with the bottom as reference means removal - inherently making the game less fun and units stand out less. - if instead you increase everyone to the same level each with it's own caveat, you increase the fun factor and make all of the choices unique. By nerfing you get a duller experience with a bland homogeneity - it's objectively better to get uniqueness and flush each to shine....

But in this case the major issue lies with defects on their combat system rather than troops being objectively OP - I'm going to insist that to properly evaluate this subject they must first fix the issues, specially the AI... Nerfing them now would be a band-aid that they will have to change later again no matter what - waste of time and resources...


pointless unless you want them to not change the AI at all... They must first fix the AI than we see...
Click to expand...

It is better to buff the whole units roster to avoid nerfing two clear OP units? Yeah, sure…

I can understand that AI still needs tweaks. I also understand that all archers units are still overperforming, mostly because arrows are still doing too much damage against armored units, but Fian and Khan’s Guard are simply much better doing everything than any other unit. Improving armor protection against arrows/bolts would make these units a bit less OP, but they would continue being much better than anything else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Erundil
Native OSP 3D Art Better Banners
Replies
1
Views
610
Swyter
Swyter
Dejan
  • Sticky
Patch Notes v1.2.7
6 7 8
Replies
149
Views
36K
Gianna99
SP - General Armor Crafting. Is that ever happening?
Replies
4
Views
961
SudianX
Back
Top Bottom