It is time to re-balance two handers.

[Namakan]

On the topic of two handers, I cry out in despair for a flat damage reduction all across the board, I'm having less and less fun getting one-tap deleted by a voulge, hammer or a menavlion due to a single mistake. With proper footwork and angling, a 2h can hit faster than most 1h weapons, combine that with crush through and w-e-w we have infantry that can run circles around you, staying out of range and dealing 60+ dmg per hit with the chance to crush through.

And having Fiann, an archer class, be able to do more damage in melee per swing than all shield infantry in the game due to spawning with a 2h sword is just

Yikes.

what do you mean twohanders onehit too much? just yesterday I was consistently getting 90-99 damage on sergeants through their shield with the battanian hammer, not a single onehit!

 

[mrArgentum]

2 hander must be stronger in 1vs1 than shieldman or what the point to take this class? It's fragile and have a tiny shield. People just got used to the fact that two-handers were **** before in warband and think that they should continue to be. Now it is possible to use two handers on a serious clan wars and this is good. It brings variety. And there is actually just few guys who can use heavy weapon on a decent level in this game. So what the point to cry?

 

[TheBard]

Let two-handers be there, but it's annoying that archers are getting the edge on infantry in 1v1 with this by literally spawning with that equipment. You can go swo/bo with archers or take the 2-hander and with crushthrough being a thing I do consider it not really cool to have around.

Imagine Fiann with Great Falx. While before a single player is enough to push an archer, now you run into the danger that this guy will crushthrough and demolish the infantry which does take the risk of 1) getting shot because shields don't protect you unless it's a pavise, 2) getting endlessly kited because archers are as fast as inf, 3) well yeah, he can cru$$$$hthrough...

I tried this in public btw. I depleted the HP pool of some poor swo/bo dude and then finished the job with one lucky overhead delivering 30 damage through the shield, which is a low blow for crushing through as well, this can be way higher. Should I mention that Great Falx on top of the immense stun and crushthrough also wrecks shields super quick? Duh...

 

[Rangah]

2 hander must be stronger in 1vs1 than shieldman or what the point to take this class? It's fragile and have a tiny shield. People just got used to the fact that two-handers were **** before in warband and think that they should continue to be. Now it is possible to use two handers on a serious clan wars and this is good. It brings variety. And there is actually just few guys who can use heavy weapon on a decent level in this game. So what the point to cry?

They should have more damage, but should they have flat damage than exceeds the total HP of a character? This concept of having such weapons in the game at all just feels stupid. The less oneshot mechanics there are in the game, the better imo.

 

[Ikea Knight]

They should have more damage, but should they have flat damage than exceeds the total HP of a character? This concept of having such weapons in the game at all just feels stupid. The less oneshot mechanics there are in the game, the better imo.

I think one-shotting peasant-classes and light archers is fine.
Everything else is too much. I think some weapons are just too strong. But I like that TW improved two handers. Now they have a place in Skirmish before 1.5. Two-Handers were mostly a meme in competetiv play.

 

[Rangah]

I think one-shotting peasant-classes and light archers is fine.

Yes, but this is more what I had in mind when creating my QQ post ⬇

what do you mean twohanders onehit too much? just yesterday I was consistently getting 90-99 damage on sergeants through their shield with the battanian hammer, not a single onehit!

 

[Mushbeast]

Well, time to draw gets decreased and as it looks the aim stays a bit more longer sharp then we have it now, so that's a buff. Period.

Maybe this comes from impression of DIvision A in BEAST, but there's a reason there are not many archers put into action there and that's because they will relently and always get pressured because one archer able to shoot with no pressure is deleting 2-3 players on the opposing team, no biggie.
Dedicated archers even cried to me as their captain that "they can't do **** because they instantly get focussed". Weeeeeell, you have the class with the highest damage output and no risk to take damage yourself if you are not pressured, ofc you get focussed and pushed.

If you check wild public games, you have games where there are four light archers demolishing heavy infantry and heavy cav alike with relentless crossfire as well, so while I do understand why the devs do it (increase the fun of archer play?) I hardly find it justified.

You're probably right, but they could create custom weapons for multiplayer that might not be as strong as the footage we've seen already. Knowing our track record it'll probably end up making them OP again regardless.

I don't play Skirmish (mainly just TDM and Siege back when it had players) and I find archers the most annoying class there is. Cavalry used to be pretty bad but they're easily countered, but often times it feels like you're utterly helpless against archers. In Skirmish I could see it being slightly more manageable as there's less archers to deal with, and therefore less crossfire like you said. Imagine if they do implement battle mode and we're up against fifty of these archers at a time, especially if they can kite like they do now.

I can't help but feel like so much of this could be remedied if the crosshair didn't adjust for drop so perfectly. I mess around with a compound bow every now and then, and even after years I can hardly effectively hit a target at medium range let alone a moving target.

 

[greedogre]

2 hander must be stronger in 1vs1 than shieldman or what the point to take this class? It's fragile and have a tiny shield. People just got used to the fact that two-handers were **** before in warband and think that they should continue to be. Now it is possible to use two handers on a serious clan wars and this is good. It brings variety. And there is actually just few guys who can use heavy weapon on a decent level in this game. So what the point to cry?

what do you mean by stronger? in mount& blade your opponent either over power you or they don't, what do you mean by fragile? most used 2h take 2-3 hit to kill a 160 point HI while it took 3 to 4 hit or even more to kill a 2h. there are two hit potential with axe but again if you kill by an 1h axe with average reach of under 80, you really mess up your sense of length and distance. they can only strike you by doing left and upper swing to keep up your speed, if shielder do a right swing and 2h block it and continue to moving their left, shielder will compeletly lost the reach and open a 1-2 free swing for 2h, again if you fail for a stupied harmless feint it's not a balance issue the only real feint is the upper slash, the rest is not even wroth to try, just spam your right attack if you have weapon reach of more than 150 reach.

in warband THE LONGEST reach 2h is nord great axe with 135 reach. and right now vorlge have same reach but deal almost insant dmg with animation and they are way more stupied stuff than in warband, btw voelger doesnt even look like an 135 reach weapon at all.

in warband there was no artifical speed boost on "class" eveyone is basically on equal footing minus gear weight. i dont need to tell you what bannerlord looks like, they were great 2h player i dread to play in warband, but not like now where you mathmatically dont have any odd

am not asking for weapon change now, start with movment speed change, this wont affect average player experence at all, but the balance goal should be to keep the top player out of abusing eveyone else not abusing the system. in warband it used to be not how abusive you can get and if you try you can reach the top by any mean you choose, because this was how i became one of the best player in my old region. if this is not a great slogan for a muti-player competitive game i dont know what is.

BTW, Did you see blizzad balance starcraft for ladders? they balance for the tounament like esl or gsl.

and only after a tweak on 2h you can start change on archer, othewise the whole thing just fall apart again.

(KR) knight of rhodes, the one sit on the TOP of the leaderborad already start to kill off the rest of the clan in my region by abusing this archer 2h meta, if there is no balance change on core issuse with this archer 2h meta. i dont think there will be any clan left to fight.

 

[Firunien]

what do you mean by stronger? in mount& blade your opponent either over power you or they don't, what do you mean by fragile? most used 2h take 2-3 hit to kill a 160 point HI while it took 3 to 4 hit or even more to kill a 2h. there are two hit potential with axe but again if you kill by an 1h axe with average reach of under 80, you really mess up your sense of length and distance. they can only strike you by doing left and upper swing to keep up your speed, if shielder do a right swing and 2h block it and continue to moving their left, shielder will compeletly lost the reach and open a 1-2 free swing for 2h, again if you fail for a stupied harmless feint it's not a balance issue the only real feint is the upper slash, the rest is not even wroth to try, just spam your right attack if you have weapon reach of more than 150 reach.

in warband THE LONGEST reach 2h is nord great axe with 135 reach. and right now vorlge have same reach but deal almost insant dmg with animation and they are way more stupied stuff than in warband, btw voelger doesnt even look like an 135 reach weapon at all.

in warband there was no artifical speed boost on "class" eveyone is basically on equal footing minus gear weight. i dont need to tell you what bannerlord looks like, they were great 2h player i dread to play in warband, but not like now where you mathmatically dont have any odd

am not asking for weapon change now, start with movment speed change, this wont affect average player experence at all, but the balance goal should be to keep the top player out of abusing eveyone else not abusing the system. in warband it used to be not how abusive you can get and if you try you can reach the top by any mean you choose, because this was how i became one of the best player in my old region. if this is not a great slogan for a muti-player competitive game i dont know what is.

BTW, Did you see blizzad balance starcraft for ladders? they balance for the tounament like esl or gsl.

and only after a tweak on 2h you can start change on archer, othewise the whole thing just fall apart again.

(KR) knight of rhodes, the one sit on the TOP of the leaderborad already start to kill off the rest of the clan in my region by abusing this archer 2h meta, if there is no balance change on core issuse with this archer 2h meta. i dont think there will be any clan left to fight.

Just one point, warband had artificial movement speed boost for different classes, it was called athletics and was used in MP.

 

[greedogre]

Just one point, warband had artificial movement speed boost for different classes, it was called athletics and was used in MP.

i know what you mean, it just not play as much of role as today, because there was no class at all, and everyone is on light armor most of the time, so the different is not that much.

same goes for why in warband cav wasn't as op as bannerlord, it's because no one can afford heavy barding horse and when that happen it atually give similar outcome in warband.

again this combat system is too complicate to be simplfied into one or two point, it's combanation of point lead to a conclusion.

 

[WMorton]

2 hander must be stronger in 1vs1 than shieldman or what the point to take this class? It's fragile and have a tiny shield. People just got used to the fact that two-handers were **** before in warband and think that they should continue to be. Now it is possible to use two handers on a serious clan wars and this is good. It brings variety. And there is actually just few guys who can use heavy weapon on a decent level in this game. So what the point to cry?

it should be even, and the fact that crushthrough is a thing is bs and makes that fight near impossible to win if both sides are experienced

 

[mrArgentum]

it should be even, and the fact that crushthrough is a thing is bs and makes that fight near impossible to win if both sides are experienced

Why even? What the point to take two hander then? If i can take shield and be protected of arrows and take a spear and be protected of cav? And have more armor.

 

[Yukmouth++]

A big issue is the massive difference of damage between armor and low armor. You hit certain classes for 150 and others for 35. You fight a legionary it takes your voulge an average of 3 hits while on tier 1 inf you literally kill their whole family in one swing. The legionary 2 Shots the voulgier and the 1h tier 1 takes like 4 Shots. Armor dmg réduction is just too effective while the dmg of 2h on leather armor and cloth is exagarated.

 

[Ikea Knight]

Why even? What the point to take two hander then? If i can take shield and be protected of arrows and take a spear and be protected of cav? And have more armor.

yeah I have to agree.
Two handers have to have an edge over shield user because they have worse match up against archers and cav.
But I think crush through was an unnecessary mechanic anyway.

 

[TheBard]

A big issue is the massive difference of damage between armor and low armor. You hit certain classes for 150 and others for 35. You fight a legionary it takes your voulge an average of 3 hits while on tier 1 inf you literally kill their whole family in one swing. The legionary 2 Shots the voulgier and the 1h tier 1 takes like 4 Shots. Armor dmg réduction is just too effective while the dmg of 2h on leather armor and cloth is exagarated.

According to the developers viewpoints and game design, Knights and Peasants shall be present on the same battlefield and shall be NOT equal in power.

On the other hand I pay for the legionary a way higher price than for the 100 gold meme throwing class and I am way slower, whats the point in cut damage delivered by swords and axes if I can't cut light inf to pieces? If you have higher armor than it should protect you.

tbh, if you wanna go triple spawn or multiple spawn with light classes, it's perfectly justified you can just tank two hits.
If you want to bring the Siege/TDM argument now, well, it was similar in Warband so its not that big of a change, casual mode was full of chaos back then and it's here now as well. It's just the nature of the game mode.

 

[hoonii]

I think one-shotting peasant-classes and light archers is fine.
Everything else is too much. I think some weapons are just too strong. But I like that TW improved two handers. Now they have a place in Skirmish before 1.5. Two-Handers were mostly a meme in competetiv play.

I'm seriously very very tired of my HEAVILY ARMORED horse dying to two arrows from a peasant bow. Same goes for the javelins, even the worst ones are able to deal 150 damage max. Apparently TW listens to people who cries a lot so I wanna cry too for once. Reduce damage done to horses by bows and javelins pleaseeeeee. With the ranged combat update archers are getting nice buff which probably(%90) means that they will be able to shoot a horse that is charging right into them more accurately and faster with the same damage and playing as cav is going to be more cancerous, as if it's not already...

 

[WMorton]

Why even? What the point to take two hander then? If i can take shield and be protected of arrows and take a spear and be protected of cav? And have more armor.

Because 2handers should be a skill weapon. The people who used then in real life were skillful with them. They are high damage weapons which can 1 and 2 hit opponents, but making them crushthrough makes it so that someone who does the correct block will be punished and possibly 1 tapped. I can't tell you how many clutches have been ruined by noobs just crushthroughing people.

 

[TheBard]

I'm seriously very very tired of my HEAVILY ARMORED horse dying to two arrows from a peasant bow. Same goes for the javelins, even the worst ones are able to deal 150 damage max. Apparently TW listens to people who cries a lot so I wanna cry too for once. Reduce damage done to horses by bows and javelins pleaseeeeee. With the ranged combat update archers are getting nice buff which probably(%90) means that they will be able to shoot a horse that is charging right into them more accurately and faster with the same damage and playing as cav is going to be more cancerous, as if it's not already...

You want archers put in their place? You came to the wrong neighborhood for that.

 

[Hans 77]

Well, ranged gets buffed again in the next patch, so tough luck for that.

I don't understand why Taleworlds has this compulsion to make archers the equivalent of Apollo descended to Earth.

They already have the ability to scoot n' shoot, very user-friendly aiming mechanics, pre-nocked arrows, can kite inf ad infinitum, targets with more forgiving hitboxes than in Warband, and have a high dps.

I thought (at least shooting/aiming mechanics-wise) they were in a pretty good place with the recent patches, but I guess the very small but very loud "Archers are ruined!" crowd got to the devs. I suppose we'll see them go back closer to their pre-1.5 accuracy window and fire rate...

I think cav is in a pretty good place now too (minus instances of side stacking and inconsistent couch lance damage output), maybe we should double horse armor and make them ignore spears again, you know, like back in the good ol' days? (pre-1.5)

 

[Firunien]

I don't understand why Taleworlds has this compulsion to make archers the equivalent of Apollo descended to Earth.

They already have the ability to scoot n' shoot, very user-friendly aiming mechanics, pre-nocked arrows, can kite inf ad infinitum, targets with more forgiving hitboxes than in Warband, and have a high dps.

I thought (at least shooting/aiming mechanics-wise) they were in a pretty good place with the recent patches, but I guess the very small but very loud "Archers are ruined!" crowd got to the devs. I suppose we'll see them go back closer to their pre-1.5 accuracy window and fire rate...

I think cav is in a pretty good place now too (minus instances of side stacking and inconsistent couch lance damage output), maybe we should double horse armor and make them ignore spears again, you know, like back in the good ol' days? (pre-1.5)

I have neither seen people complaining about archery beeing too weak in general nor TaleWorlds stating they intend to buff archers, it's pure assumption about their announced ranged weapon rework. The only big criticism was about the accuracy change while moving, especially for throwing weapons, because the penalty feels over the top.