In Response to "Current Situation"

Currently viewing this thread:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jess_the_Hobozerk

Grandmaster Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
I feel this needs a thread of it's own so more people can see the context of what I'm going to state.

Lets start off with the fun topic:
Balance
  There is a lot of talk about the balance of warband between its classes, factions, weapons, style, animations, etc.  I'm just going to say it bluntly, you ready for it?  The game is balanced, who knew!  You can't relate realism to balance because real life isn't fair, in real life cavalry > all (except pikemen) the game is set up in a way so that skill determines what counters whatever you want it to counter.  You can beat someone with a greatsword with a melee javelin if you are good enough. 

  There is no such thing as faction balance in every game, true faction balance would leave the exact same faction for every faction.  You need to adapt to what you have been given, learn the strengths and weaknesses of the faction.

  I however haven't brought up the main topic of balance yet.  ARCHERS!!!  Here's what I see when I see someone crying about archers, I see many things but here's the main ones.  "Dude I'm cavalry I should beat that archer but he just headshot me wtf IMBALANCE!"  "Dude wtf archer spammurz let me charge you with my greatsw0rdz! IMBALANCE!"  "WtF I Can'T eVen FIghT InFantry without getting Headshot By teh enemyz too accurate!  IMBALANCE!"

#1).  You need to remember something, just because someone is an archer, DOESN'T MEAN THEY ARE BAD AT THE GAME.
#2).  Cavalry charges enemy archer expecting to win, they lose because they charged without intelligence of who they were fighting and if they are good or not. 
#3).  People running around with 2 handed weapons without cover is asking for an arrow to the head. 
#4).  Archery is very accurate yes, though it also runs the risk of something worse, tking an ally, before you fight infantry make sure that you aren't in a tactical disadvantage benefiting archers; I.e. Don't run out in the open with your back facing the enemy. 
#5).  When you fight an other infantry with an archer helping the infantry, you need to remember something, IT'S A 2v1!  It's the exact same as fighting 2 infantry players at the same time though you have to adapt to predicting the shots.
#6).  Like it or not, archers are in the game and will remain in the game.  Deal with it, learn how to be a better tactician so you don't give them easy shots.
#7).  Archers are coded with lower athletics, weapon skill, shield skill, iron flesh, and power strike than infantry players, they are NOT better than an infantry player.

Archers = Infantry = Cavalry, enough said.

Glitches/Animations/Glances
  The glitches in this game are so rare and small that for an indie game that you shouldn't be complaining about it, most indie games have many many glitches.
Animations can definitely be improved, but as I said with glitches, it's an indie game give them some slack that they can't hire the best animator in the world.
Glances are not a bug, it is hard coded in the game do occur when you don't have enough power strike, speed bonus, or a heavy enough weapon to penetrate the armor of the opponent.  Make sure to hit your opponent at the sweet spot of your designated weapon, moving forward towards them while keeping range, and hitting them in the middle of the animation.

Competitive Tactics
  Ahh the fabled archer/cavalry team, *looks at BkS*.  There is nothing wrong with archers and cavalry making up an entire team on a random plains map, as the title clearly states, this is competitive tactics.  Lets look at the word tactics, what it states in gaming, is a strategic game play style that is developed to take advantage of a certain aspect of the game to better your teams chances of victory. Tactics change all the time when better and better tactics are discovered.  There's no easy way to tell how you counter the stated tactic of archers and cavalry on a random plains, but you can say one thing.  You can match tactics with tactics, fire with fire, it evens the playing field so that the greater skilled team will emerge victorious.  Also, the same tactics are impossible to pull off on every map of the game.

  While we are talking about Tactics we can also include more balance talk to archers.  Archers are favored on some maps like random plains, field by the river, and other very open maps.  But is it not the same for cavalry, and infantry?  Different classes benefit better on certain maps.  Adapt to the map you are playing on, and learn to use better tactics.
 

RalliX

Count
M&BWBWF&SVC
Mmm. Damn straight dawg.
Still though, it's annoying* if the enemy team rapes yours with 100% of their guys being Warbowmen.
"We can't take firepower of that magnitude!"



*But not impossible to beat.
 

Jess_the_Hobozerk

Grandmaster Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
I agree, though that only happens in random pug matches and it's impossible to learn balance from those.  It doesn't happen in the competitive scene because it's not a viable option because tactics counters it.  Only in high skill play do you see flaws in a game.
 

RalliX

Count
M&BWBWF&SVC
RockerJesse said:
I agree, though that only happens in random pug matches and it's impossible to learn balance from those.  It doesn't happen in the competitive scene because it's not a viable option because tactics counters it.  Only in high skill play do you see flaws in a game.
Actually, something similar happened to me in an EU match.
It was a training fight between CoR and the Einharjar/Shieldings.
During a couple rounds in particular in our heated Nord Vs. Vaegir rounds on Nord Town, we had to deal with Vaegir warbowmen constantly firing into the melee, often screwing us. This of course implies not 100% of archers in their team, but it seemed like the firepower they had was enough to rip apart our shields and kill all our own archers.
 

Jess_the_Hobozerk

Grandmaster Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
It's just the tactics in my opinion, nord town is a very closed map and it heavily favors archers shooting into melee battles that generally occur in the center or in the U above center.  You shouldn't be fighting in the line of sight of archers on that map and force them to be at a disadvantage by making them move off of the roofs.  Your infantry needs to be perfectly coordinated and not allow the few infantry on the opposing team to distract them and lower their shield defense to the archers.

Archers tend to force more tactics rather than individual player skill when it comes to clan matches.
 

Kitten-mew!

Knight at Arms
Most people don't have a problem with "tactics" - they have a problem with the prevalence of archers in play. The urge not to give the 'easy shots' is what results in the (at least, what I feel is) stagnant US metagame. Nobody wants to be shot, crossfires and archer spreads are paramount, and risks are avoided near entirely. It results in a campfest, like it or not.

At least for the forums, most people aren't derpy idiots who complain about archers because it ruins their naked two-handed festival. Most forum-goers have genuine concern for the health of the game with archery serving as a topic for rebalance, not mindless crybaby nerfing. This thread looks like you're berating people who complain about archery, but looks like an ill-equipped defense that draws most of its ground from random in-game complaints by pubbers.

MODIFY: There's sure as heck nothing wrong with pubbing and I've got nothing against it. Someone crying because they got HS while charging naked, two-handed sword hoisted over their head, is different from someone debating whether the competitive scene is healthy or not with the dominance of archery.
 

Jess_the_Hobozerk

Grandmaster Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
I was a little dramatic with the derpy complainers because I see it too much and it frustrates me when I see no brain process complainers whining about game mechanics.  I'm active in the competitive, modding, and pubbing scene and I have been since beta, hell I've been around since .6 vanilla, and I hardly believe archers are the sole reason of why games turn into camp fests.  Don't insult me by saying the thread is invalid because it "berating people who complain about archery from in-game complaints by pubbers" it's organized in that way so it appeals to the majority of warband players. 

I respond to concerns from the competitive scene as I will from the pubbers.

Also to contrary belief, this thread isn't about defending archery just because I'm one of the better archers in warband, I'm a good infantry too.  It's about addressing that it's player skill and tactics why they die, not imbalance.
 
Just on the animation - the animations aren't really bad of themselves (I mean, they're mostly motion-captured after all). The problem is that they're badly designed, and I mean both the design of the physical movements and the design of the animations to work within the mechanics. As a result you get some odd-looking moves, like the spear-thrust and the overhead attacks, as well as problems with the transitions between animations, which is why spammed attacks and feints look so strange.

Haven't read or thought about the rest, but I felt like mentioning that.
 

Jess_the_Hobozerk

Grandmaster Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Yeah, they could definitely be improved, but taleworlds has kind of abandoned us it seems, so we'll most likely just have to use mods until project obvious if they are improving all of the bugs glitches animations whatnot.  It's a tad bit lazy of them to not fix some of the obvious simple problems within the game.
 

Henk

Sergeant
The problem is that being an archer is just too easy in comparison with other classes. As an archer, it takes little trouble to shoot an incoming cavalry man charging either in the body (when he tries to strike) or to the horse's face when he tries to bump, unrelated to the horseman's skill level. When fighting another infantryman it's not hard to shoot the shield a bunch of times until he is close, switch to melee/run and shoot again.

Same thing being infantry. Most of the time I have to worry about getting shot, in whatever situation. Fighting 1 vs 2, 2 vs 2, 3 vs 2, doesn't matter. The biggest threat in any fight as any class whatsoever is getting shot.
That's the whole problem, you might say that archery is balanced as the teamwork the particular archer is superior or the fact that he's generally a more skilled player (I don't agree) yet I think the fact that it's atleast just as powerfull as the other classes makes it overpowered.

If any class should be underpowered then it should be the ranged class. As it's the best combat feature in the game the melee system should be superior to archery, this would make for better Battles be it Competitive or just public. A skilled nerfed archer in, say, shooting speed and drawed-arrow-accuracy-time-thingy will still be able to shoot 2H's and more easily horsemen down, yet your average archer will have a harder time beating every single opponent of whatever skill level.

I've been playing this game since beta on both competitive and public level and I've seen more than enough to know that the ranged weapons are more powerfull than they should be and that they ruin the melee capabilities of the combat system. I've been trying to get my opinion across as clear as possible but you have to understand it's hard to write it down clearly.     
 

Skandinav

Grandmaster Knight
M&BWB
Henk said:
As it's the best combat feature in the game the melee system should be superior to archery, this would make for better Battles be it Competitive or just public.
 

Hamel

Sergeant Knight
Henk said:
The problem is that being an archer is just too easy in comparison with other classes.

Your statement leads me to question how much time you have actually spent playing as an archer.

In my experience, I'd say that playing an archer is generally more difficult for me than playing as infantry. As infantry, it's not very hard to mow through most enemies I fight, as an archer, killing people is significantly more challenging. That's why I like playing as an archer, it's challenging, and it gives me a chance to practice both my melee and ranged skills.

Henk said:
As an archer, it takes little trouble to shoot an incoming cavalry man charging either in the body (when he tries to strike) or to the horse's face when he tries to bump, unrelated to the horseman's skill level.

I assure you, it's not as easy as it looks, and it's definitely not unrelated to the horseman's skill. A skilled horseman must close distance (preferably while the archer is distracted or unaware to limit damage to one's horse) and maintain it, when fighting an archer. The point is to stay close enough to the archer to prevent them from notching an arrow while you slash at their unprotected body as they feebly try to pull back their bow while you're repeatedly side-bumping them with your horse. If they try to switch to their melee weapon you'll get exactly what you wanted in the first place. I'll admit this is all rather difficult, but that's what skill is all about, isn't it? Unfortunately, skilled horsemen seem to be quite rare these days.

Henk said:
When fighting another infantryman it's not hard to shoot the shield a bunch of times until he is close, switch to melee/run and shoot again.

Not hard? This is practically impossible. Archers are slower than infantry, and the time it takes to load and fire the arrow is quite substantial in this case. The infantry will inevitably catch the archer.

The only situation where this is really possible and effective is when multiple archers are present, and no reasonable amount of archery nerfs will stop them from being asses in this manner.

Henk said:
Same thing being infantry. Most of the time I have to worry about getting shot, in whatever situation. Fighting 1 vs 2, 2 vs 2, 3 vs 2, doesn't matter. The biggest threat in any fight as any class whatsoever is getting shot.

Being worried about getting shot is part of the skill in combating archery. You must be aware of all archers present, keep an eye on all the towers, pay attention to those dark allies. Your shield and your perception are your defense in this regard. If you didn't have to worry about archers, this game would suddenly become significantly more boring.

Also, I wouldn't say it's the greatest threat. I'd consider that big axe the brutish oaf in front of me is swinging around as a greater threat. I rarely get hit by missiles, let alone killed by them. That's what my shield is for (or walls, if I don't have one).

Henk said:
That's the whole problem, you might say that archery is balanced as the teamwork the particular archer is superior or the fact that he's generally a more skilled player (I don't agree) yet I think the fact that it's atleast just as powerfull as the other classes makes it overpowered.

So... if archery, as a whole, is balanced, it's unbalanced? I'm sorry, but that is ridiculous.

Henk said:
If any class should be underpowered then it should be the ranged class. As it's the best combat feature in the game the melee system should be superior to archery, this would make for better Battles be it Competitive or just public.

Just because you enjoy the unique melee combat of Mount&Blade more than the also-rather-unique ranged combat of the same game doesn't mean that ranged combat should be inferior. That is the very definition of unbalanced.

If archer classes were inferior to melee classes, why would anyone want to play archers?

Henk said:
I've been playing this game since beta on both competitive and public level and I've seen more than enough to know that the ranged weapons are more powerfull than they should be and that they ruin the melee capabilities of the combat system.

I've been playing this game since the first day of beta, and had my share of pubs and a decent amount of scrims I merc'd for. I've seen more than enough to know that ranged weapons are fine, and that they complement the melee combat in this game.

Good day, sir!
 

MadocComadrin

Water-Borne Annelid
Count
M&BWBWF&S
Kitten-mew! said:
At least for the forums, most people aren't derpy idiots who complain about archers because it ruins their naked two-handed festival. Most forum-goers have genuine concern for the health of the game with archery serving as a topic for rebalance, not mindless crybaby nerfing. This thread looks like you're berating people who complain about archery, but looks like an ill-equipped defense that draws most of its ground from random in-game complaints by pubbers.

MODIFY: There's sure as heck nothing wrong with pubbing and I've got nothing against it. Someone crying because they got HS while charging naked, two-handed sword hoisted over their head, is different from someone debating whether the competitive scene is healthy or not with the dominance of archery.
This. In addition, most complaints from pubbers are about the sheer number of archers, not their abilities.
 

Jess_the_Hobozerk

Grandmaster Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Thank you Ando for clearing that up for me, I just got back to my computer and saw all the posts but then I saw yours and I'm like whoo less time posting!

Mount and Blade's combat system is such a unique style that only a few other games have anything similar to it.  The result is the most interactive melee combat system possible.  You claim that archery leeches the soul from this combat system to the point of where it is barely used.  I get from this you are referring to two handed weapons because shield fighting is still used.  I am going to say this only once.  You can still use the two handed weapons!  I have one person who is a prime example; Beer, he constantly is harassed for using two handed weapons in matches, yet he usually is top of the scoreboard. The reason he can pull it off is because he has game sense, skill, and knows how to use cover correctly.

Archers are a unit, with their own unique style of play, Madoc.  I could easily complain about the number of cavalry on random plains or the numbers of infantry on Nord Town.  If you can't accept the game as a whole I dare say you are not a true mount and blade fan.

As my infantry experience I would say 95% of my deaths are to cavalry and other infantry.  The other 5% would go to the crossbows, bows, and thrown projectiles.  Even on Arena I don't have problems with archery, it's called game awareness, skill, and owning a good shield.
 

MadocComadrin

Water-Borne Annelid
Count
M&BWBWF&S
RockerJesse said:
Archers are a unit, with their own unique style of play, Madoc.  I could easily complain about the number of cavalry on random plains or the numbers of infantry on Nord Town.  If you can't accept the game as a whole I dare say you are not a true mount and blade fan.
Well that's all well and good, but when one team (in public) is composed of 90% archers, things really aren't that fun. They either mow down their opponents or get mowed down--depending on the gamemode and the players--and those rounds are usually pretty boring.
 

Jess_the_Hobozerk

Grandmaster Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
MadocComadrin said:
RockerJesse said:
Archers are a unit, with their own unique style of play, Madoc.  I could easily complain about the number of cavalry on random plains or the numbers of infantry on Nord Town.  If you can't accept the game as a whole I dare say you are not a true mount and blade fan.
Well that's all well and good, but when one team (in public) is composed of 90% archers, things really aren't that fun. They either mow down their opponents or get mowed down--depending on the gamemode and the players--and those rounds are usually pretty boring.
In my opinion it's not really that fun on random plains to see everyone as cav.  I don't go around saying that it ruins the game though.
 

Hrethgar

Recruit
RockerJesse said:
In my opinion it's not really that fun on random plains to see everyone as cav.  I don't go around saying that it ruins the game though.

In my mind, there are only two things that make Warband unique.

1.  Mounted combat:  No other game I can think of has come close to modeling the adrenaline rush of riding a horse into a medieval battle.
2.  Infantry combat:  The melee mechanics are so awesomely brutal and yet so amazingly elegant at the same time.  Learning to melee in M&B is such great experience because there's so many layers to it.  First you figure out how to do the different swings.  Then you learn how to manual block and that opens a lot of options.  Then you learn about chamber blocking and it's like a whole new world.  There's also feinting, footwork, and a dozen other intricate aspects that keep you coming back.

In my mind, it's the infantry combat that really stands out.  Cavalry is fun for a while, but it's the melee that keeps me coming back.  However, the explosion of ranged-users basically saps that horrendously.  You can be in an awesome duel with someone and have it ruined by some lamer with a bow and arrow 200 yards away in a bush (to be fair, cav can do that too).  The major difference in my mind is that a cav-player HAS to come within melee distance of me to kill me, and I can kill them right back.  Archers don't have to do that.  If you get close to an archer, all they have to do is run.  Almost always archers are less weighed down and can run from almost anything.

In the end, the only reason I find myself playing cav at all these days (which I'd really prefer not to have to do) is because I don't feel like wasting my time chasing down a cowardly archer, just to have them run off with me having no hope of catching them.

 

Orion

Still Not Worthy
Global Moderator
M&BWBWF&SNW
You lend yourself no credit when your best argument against archery is this:

Hrethgar said:
You can be in an awesome duel with someone and have it ruined by some lamer with a bow and arrow 200 yards away

Awww, somebody in a game killed you while you were having fun. What a shame! It must not be fair because your sword isn't 200 yards long, right? You can't hit them back! There's no risk involved for them when they shoot you, right? Wrong. Unless you're playing Deathmatch, Warband is a team game. You can fight back against archers without having a ranged weapon yourself. You have a team, and if your team plays intelligently you can counter archers with positioning & maneuvering or with archers of your own.

Intelligent archers (gosh, what a concept!) will prioritize immediate threats to them first: other archers, then cavalry, infantry last. If you're getting shot by archers it means there's no bigger threat to that archer than you, which means you need to reevaluate your position on the battlefield. Why are you the biggest threat? Is it because you're close to the archer? Can your archers not see the enemy archer? Is your cavalry running off somewhere else? Are you ganging up on a single infantryman and the archer is trying to support him? Are you just an easy target? If you're an infantryman and you're getting shot at, one of those is likely true, and you need to back off and get support. Don't just hold your W key until you reach the enemies and then expect to duel at your leisure.

Get real. Battle mode isn't made for "awesome duels." It's a team game, and teams have archers.
 

Calamity

Il Padrino
Count
RockerJesse said:
As my infantry experience I would say 95% of my deaths are to cavalry and other infantry.  The other 5% would go to the crossbows, bows, and thrown projectiles.  Even on Arena I don't have problems with archery, it's called game awareness, skill, and owning a good shield.

95% is pretty bloated. I don't care how well you hold your shield, if you turn your back a jav/arrow will be promptly placed in you if you playing someone good at throwing/archery. So either you are playing with people who suck, or use spears. I assume it's the former. :smile:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom