Incredibly large shields!!! Archers should be buffed and cavalry nerfed!

Currently viewing this thread:

Varian King

Sergeant
WBNW
Best answers
0
But you also have to stay in touch with reality. I'd find it pretty ridiculous if 90% of your arrows disappeared into nowhere
 

Caps

Knight at Arms
WBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
Its either this or shields become useless
Shields should mostly cover the area they do physically but archer/ranged dmg should be tuned down. So getting hit is not that punishing, which will allow gameplay without shields to some extent.
 

Percival!!

Knight
Best answers
0
Footshotting is in a much better state than at launch. Shield coverage while held up should probably be slightly larger than it is now, which would make it somewhere in line with Warband.
IMO though shields should have less passive coverage. When someone using a shield isn't even blocking the shield still has a massive amount of coverage, still exceeding the actual size of the shield. In Warband, I remember it being extremely rare for a shield to protect you from a shot if it wasn't actively being held up in a block. In Bannerlord it's extremely common, an extreme case is the Battanian cav's (which needs to be buffed in other ways but has large shield coverage from horseback) shield which even when attacking protects from almost all frontal shots by archers.
 

Younes

Master Knight
WBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
Shields should mostly cover the area they do physically but archer/ranged dmg should be tuned down. So getting hit is not that punishing, which will allow gameplay without shields to some extent.
If you nerf archers too much people will also stop playing archers as a whole
 

Noudelle

Grandmaster Knight
WBM&BWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
Has the idea of an archer limit per team been discussed on here in the past?
 

Noudelle

Grandmaster Knight
WBM&BWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
people can still pick up stuff and its kinda frustrating playin a ****tier class than the enemy
Fewer ranged weapons to find on the ground if fewer players can spawn them.
Archer classes could and should be more expensive to use, this could be facilitated by the wonderful class system that is currently in place.
 

King Yngvar

Squire
WBVC
Best answers
0
For the sake of some plausibility. The shields shouldn't cover more than the area they are physically at and they should also cover where they are at when not right clicking against melee as well (they only seem to do that against projectiles currently). However, and you as an archer wouldn't like this, arrows need to be made into a separate damage category. I've been able to sort of do that using the custom damage mod, set arrows to cut but give the the damage multiplier for pierce based on where they hit. That means when I play singleplayer, the arrows still do more damage when hitting vital areas but are much less effective against mail and plate armor, especially since I've buffed the armor threshold factor of those two types of armor material. It would be nice to have some of this more realistic damage in multiplayer as well. The shields, I have not found a solution for.
 

Mabons

Knight at Arms
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
Not a fan of limits, it means the **** players can pick up archery classes by loading faster, leaving the actual good archers to play something they are worse at.

I'll happily see the shields only cover what they actually physically cover but you'll need to nerf archery and throwing weapons by A LOT to make it even remotely fair. I can footshot people relatively consistently and I'm not an archer player as it is. I'd see missles do less damage to armoured troops as it is anyways, it's frustrating hitting people 5 times with a sword to watching as you 2 shot them with a bow or 1 shot with a throwing weapon.
 

Caps

Knight at Arms
WBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
Fewer ranged weapons to find on the ground if fewer players can spawn them.
Archer classes could and should be more expensive to use, this could be facilitated by the wonderful class system that is currently in place.
this would force everyone to play archer if possible and then use the rest gold, i think that giving someone a stronger class is just frustrating to play against, especially if you just lose against a better class and not a better player
 

jon01

Knight
Best answers
0
The opposite can happen too:


I'm guessing it's because of Bannerlord's directional shield blocking.

If shields were only held in one direction (forward) then there would only need to be very minor forcefields covering the entire front of the body (but not so much around the sides, so that shot in the OP would have hit).

However, with the directional shield blocking, they make the forcefield go way off around the body (if you block to the side) and it remains quite a lot at the front too.

It protects similarly against melee weapons:


I wouldn't ask for archers to be buffed. Shields and infantry simply need to be fixed.
 
Last edited:

King Yngvar

Squire
WBVC
Best answers
0
Shields simply need to made to protect the area where they are physically at, no more no less, no matter if right click is being held or not.
 

Noudelle

Grandmaster Knight
WBM&BWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
Not a fan of limits, it means the **** players can pick up archery classes by loading faster, leaving the actual good archers to play something they are worse at.
this would force everyone to play archer if possible and then use the rest gold, i think that giving someone a stronger class is just frustrating to play against, especially if you just lose against a better class and not a better player
That's true. I guess these issues wouldn't exist with Warband's class system, since the cost of a loadout would be per item instead of static cost per class.
Cool.
 

Jess_the_Hobozerk

Grandmaster Knight
M&BWBWF&SNW
Best answers
0
Here comes the realism vs fun conversation.

Archers have the accuracy of olympians with our modern sci-fi super bows in M&B. All without having stamina, while toting the target acquisition rate of a P90 w/eotech kit wielded by special forces; while also being able to be efficient with any weapon they see on the ground that fits their fancy.

And you are complaining that a shield, that is the singular only counter to these gatling gun super soldiers surrounding non-archers, blocks your one laser-sighted arrow.

Give me a break.

You don't get to have your cake and eat it to when it comes to balancing. Understand that shields counter you, and to counter them, you need to tactically place yourself in order to get around the defense.

You only have 2 options to fix this.

1.) Nerf the accuracy of bows and make shields dimensions perfectly correct to their physical coverage. Pray to RNG gods that you get the arrow going in the right direction, then watch as hits that you could have had against unshielded people; miss because you are salty that there is a counter to archers and want the accuracy of a line-battle musket.

2.) Establish balanced counters so that players always know what to expect against what equipment someone is using and give the power back to the player instead, so that they can work with their advantages.

I enjoy predictability of the latter rather than praying to RNG gods that my arrow doesn't miss a pointblank shot or accidentally kill a team mate, just in the vane desire to want to kill a player using equipment designed to counter me.