Lancers - Observations, Conclusions and Solutions

[Vicccard]

Oh please, no sharpe quotes mate!

Lancers are indeed sometimes a pain in the ass, but not undefeatable. I always jump when they couch, so easy, so irritating for them.

when I'm lancer(which is quite frequently  ) if someone blocks down, I always run for better victims. When someone's ready to stab me, I charge. Lance is longer then bayonet I think, and so 7 of the 10 times, I win. those other 3 times he stabs either me horse or my face. 

 

[MaHuD]

A single lancer is not strong, just like a single horsemen is not a problem.
The problem occures when you have a whole bunch of them.
Mobility is the greatest strenght of horsemen...
The ability to be all at the same spot, for a fleeting moment being able to outnumber and overcome an enemy.

This is also exactly the reason why Lancers seem OP, in public play there is little coordination and the chaos that cav creates is therefor extremely suited for public play.

However, against a proper regiment I sincerely think that cav will fail.

 

[Metalfist]

The long and the short of it: Block if you see a lancer. Don't take on a lancer without a spear/pike or another lance. Only use the cold steel if you have first shot at the horse. Try and dismount lancers before you attack. This might be hard because they move quickly but try and shoot the rider off their horse.
Overall - Don't attack a lancer unless your sure you will come out of it alive. And please don't rage because you disturb us all.
Although there is only one problem - Couch lancers. In the fray of battle you can be couched lanced quite easily in close spaces, but that's your fault for getting into bad situations. If you are going to be couch lanced in the open field you usually have plenty of room to jump to, hide etc.

Spoiler

Lets just leave this topic for now.

 

[Partisan]

Although there is only one problem - Couch lancers.

It just reminds me Tader!

 

[Kator Viridian]

Hekko Lancers beat sworded cav ... sworded cav can beat lancers ... you are highly UNLIKELY to run into someone who is ... yourself, the points and equations you have made are if people are equally matched ... when in fact and gameplay they never are. Yes lancers beat sworded cavalry but do a test online ... which you can't do to prove your statement based on the fact you cant run the test, but failing to look at infantry is an even weaker way to try to win your argument, for one a dragoon does have a fourth attack direction ... his carbine has a melee mode.

Lancer-lance=Hussar

Hussards-150 1 hander
other heavy cav - 50 1 hander

lancer - lance = 3x weaker hussar

lancer>Hussar = lancer with lance

hussar>lancer = without lance

I think I'm happily correct there, thus disproving most of your hypothesis.

Source: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,150652.0.html

Also dragoons have 110 1 hander.

 

[Jellyfish_sammich]

Lancers in general are not overpowered, but when played by experienced players (like Tader or Olaf) only way to beat them (if they're not just screwing around) is to shoot them down. Average lancer is not a big threat and can be dealt with easily while the top players will just stay out of your range and attack with lance until you make mistake or they just couch you down. Giving them less maneuverable horses would put even best lancer on the same foot with sword cav.
Also, sword cav is better against inf than lancers, mostly because stab attacks from horse need far more timing and aiming to hit than slashing weapons, and bumpslashing is really easy to do

Indeed, most lancers tend to suck/not know what there doing. You only have to worry when you go up against someone who knows how to use the lance.

 

[Kator Viridian]

Lancers in general are not overpowered, but when played by experienced players (like Tader or Olaf) only way to beat them (if they're not just screwing around) is to shoot them down. Average lancer is not a big threat and can be dealt with easily while the top players will just stay out of your range and attack with lance until you make mistake or they just couch you down. Giving them less maneuverable horses would put even best lancer on the same foot with sword cav.
Also, sword cav is better against inf than lancers, mostly because stab attacks from horse need far more timing and aiming to hit than slashing weapons, and bumpslashing is really easy to do

Indeed, most lancers tend to suck/not know what there doing. You only have to worry when you go up against someone who knows how to use the lance.

Well its the same with all classes ... going against someone new is easier than someone who's experianced.

I've seen people been decimated by opylgineye (Spelling?) who ARE the underpowered class on the game. Apart from the sergeants and captains.

 

[Mikeyo]

Maybe when u couch the lance it should get stuck in the body and that's it really.

 

[Skass]

Pretending to be dead.

 

[Kator Viridian]

Maybe when u couch the lance it should get stuck in the body and that's it really.

I actually agree with that had a talk with smithy quite a few months ago about how lancers fought, the lance itself is not made out of breakable wood and with it tucked under your arm it would certainly catapult you off your horse if you didn't let go. The sword from what i've read and seen of pictures would almost always be carried afterall if you get the lance stuck in someone you want to keep that momentum going so ditching the lance would be a good idea to follow it up with sword.

 

[bos_jasper]

Maybe when u couch the lance it should get stuck in the body and that's it really.

I actually agree with that had a talk with smithy quite a few months ago about how lancers fought, the lance itself is not made out of breakable wood and with it tucked under your arm it would certainly catapult you off your horse if you didn't let go. The sword from what i've read and seen of pictures would almost always be carried afterall if you get the lance stuck in someone you want to keep that momentum going so ditching the lance would be a good idea to follow it up with sword.

I find this one interesting. In real life it would indeed be hard to hold on and retrieving it after it hits your opponent and probably gets stuck in him. Is this at all possible in Mount and Blade?

 

[Phalanx300]

Its possible to make it break. Vikingr team has that.

Though I still think the most realistic option is increasing the lenght (3 meters) and making it couch only.

 

[Hekko]

Hekko Lancers beat sworded cav ... sworded cav can beat lancers ... you are highly UNLIKELY to run into someone who is ... yourself, the points and equations you have made are if people are equally matched ... when in fact and gameplay they never are. Yes lancers beat sworded cavalry but do a test online ... which you can't do to prove your statement based on the fact you cant run the test, but failing to look at infantry is an even weaker way to try to win your argument, for one a dragoon does have a fourth attack direction ... his carbine has a melee mode.

I, as a person who believes everyone to be unique, would say it is impossible to run into yourself online, yet still one HAS to assume that one runs into oneself (or rather someone with exactly the same skill level in the objects of comparison as you do (since no one has an equal skill distribution between weapons and situations). This HAS to be done in order to get at the variable you are trying to analyze, in this case the strength of the lancer class. You also have to understand this, otherwise any further reasoning on my part is a waste of breath.

I can think of a few ways to test this actually, however, I lack the interest, time and rescources to do it.

One would just be to see on avarage how many kills and deaths lancers and sword cavalry get, since I assume equal skill distribution accross all classes of the game.

Another one would be to grab a hundred lancers and a hundred sword cavalry men and then first have them fight 10 duels against those in their own class, and then 10 duels against everyone of the oposite class. And you can then see if lancers do disproportionatley well compared to the skill levels established by the class-internal duels. Hell, even 30 lancers and 30 sword armed cavalry men would be enough to assume a normal distribution.

Having to look at infantry is not really necessary for the way the argument is constructed (infact that is why the argument in my opinion is so powerful, since you do not have to bring in a very hard to quantify degree of preferences), and since I as an infatryman have an interest from that point of view I might as well drop that, since it will avoid alot of l2p comments, which I as well as other people who have suggested that lancers might be slightly too powerful have recieved.

If you feel that this infantry versus cavalry must be had I suggest you make a new topic called something like "The balance of power between infantry and cavalry is fine"

I am glad that you pointed out the fact that dragoons can use a fourth attack direction, however, it is indirectly already accounted for in my equation as a part of the utility given by the carbine, furthermore it is fairly marginal.

Lancer-lance=Hussar

Hussards-150 1 hander
other heavy cav - 50 1 hander

lancer - lance = 3x weaker hussar

lancer>Hussar = lancer with lance

hussar>lancer = without lance

I think I'm happily correct there, thus disproving most of your hypothesis.

Source: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,150652.0.html

Also dragoons have 110 1 hander.

I am glad you finaly opted to aproach the argument this way.

My question goes out to all cavalry players though, how important is that extra onehanded skill? I have always thought that cavalry versus cavalry is more about slashing at each other when you pass each other, rather than a lengthy fencing match, which would imply that timing is key and thus the extra speed confered by the one handed skill is fairly wasted, the extra damage is of course a bonus, but considering the speed bonuses at play of light cavalry will this matter that much?

On foot of course the weapon skill does come into larger effect, which in turn obviously should add utility towards the hussar. So I must agree I have not factored in everything into the equation. However, I still believe that I have factored in the most important utilities, since the ones you have brought up seem marginal to me compared to the ones I brought up, nevertheless, you are indeed correct, the initial equation is slightly flawed.

 

[Kator Viridian]

I am glad you finaly opted to aproach the argument this way.

My question goes out to all cavalry players though, how important is that extra onehanded skill? (Very on ground and on horse back, one hit kill slashes is what I want)  I have always thought that cavalry versus cavalry is more about slashing at each other when you pass each other, rather than a lengthy fencing match, which would imply that timing is key (Reference to skill level difference which you wanted equal, thus hussar wins with speed) and thus the extra speed confered by the one handed skill is fairly wasted, the extra damage is of course a bonus, but considering the speed bonuses at play of light cavalry will this matter that much?

On foot of course the weapon skill does come into larger effect, which in turn obviously should add utility towards the hussar. So I must agree I have not factored in everything into the equation. However, I still believe that I have factored in the most important utilities, since the ones you have brought up seem marginal to me compared to the ones I brought up, nevertheless, you are indeed correct, the initial equation is slightly flawed.

oh no no no ... don't you suddenly twist around styles, I jumped into your court to prove you wrong and I did.

Extra one handed skill does matter, speed, strength and damage all apply to equal combatants correct? so the profciency does tip the balance ... therefore hussars are better with swords which disproves lancers being OPed.

and marginal? oh not at all experiance beats power ... especially in native, find the newest player to native, kit him in full armour, throw him against an experainced naked guy with the same weapon and the experianced one would win I'd gurentee it.

DO NOT throw out experiance! it cannot and shall never be thrown out of MM, experiance matters in MM, the more experianced players win, thats how it goes, no matter your class.

But considering you keep trying to dodge the obvious that profciency matters in your equations and that I have put them to right by doing so ... your hypotheses are wrong. Fights on horseback with swords happen, a lancer would prefer his lance but without he is weaker than any other none lancer cav ... end of, facts are facts don't dismiss them or ignore them.

 

[Sir_Ranger]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFZrzg62Zj0&feature=related Good day Sir.

 

[Hekko]

I am glad you finaly opted to aproach the argument this way.

My question goes out to all cavalry players though, how important is that extra onehanded skill? (Very on ground and on horse back, one hit kill slashes is what I want)  I have always thought that cavalry versus cavalry is more about slashing at each other when you pass each other, rather than a lengthy fencing match, which would imply that timing is key (Reference to skill level difference which you wanted equal, thus hussar wins with speed) and thus the extra speed confered by the one handed skill is fairly wasted, the extra damage is of course a bonus, but considering the speed bonuses at play of light cavalry will this matter that much?

On foot of course the weapon skill does come into larger effect, which in turn obviously should add utility towards the hussar. So I must agree I have not factored in everything into the equation. However, I still believe that I have factored in the most important utilities, since the ones you have brought up seem marginal to me compared to the ones I brought up, nevertheless, you are indeed correct, the initial equation is slightly flawed.

oh no no no ... don't you suddenly twist around styles, I jumped into your court to prove you wrong and I did.

I agreed to the bit about hussars having an extra utility on the ground, which I did not account for, however, in the grander scheme of things this is fairly minor, since you do not pick cavalry to fight dismounted. But yes, you got me there dismounted hussar =/= dismounted lancer-lance. Question is though is

Swordskill>UtilityDismountedLance

Timing has nothing to do with the relative skill levels of the combatants to do, it's merly a factor that is learned, obviously new players mistime more often than experienced ones, but assuming experienced players both will time their attacks right regardless of what the correct timing is. I.e. it's the same thing as chambering with a high/low ping.

You fail to understand the purpose of why I made an equation. It is to easily illustrate what factors in when making a rational desicion on which class will give you the most power, and how lancers have an advantage here. It will not give a good illustration if I add in every microscopic detail that has an utility, albeit an almost unquantifyably low. i.e. dragoons being able to use their carbines as blunt weapons when dismounted. Or the synergy between having a more agile horse and a longer range like lancers do.

Furthermore on the note of the extra damage, this might be the only actually important point that I, must admit, overlooked, but as I said, with light cavalry horses the speedbonuses surely are so high that one hit kills are norm, even with a lancer. Thus you hardly get any utility from the overkill, since you cannot kill an oponent "extra much" for a bonus.

Extra one handed skill does matter, speed, strength and damage all apply to equal combatants correct? so the profciency does tip the balance ... therefore hussars are better with swords which disproves lancers being OPed.

and marginal? oh not at all experiance beats power ... especially in native, find the newest player to native, kit him in full armour, throw him against an experainced naked guy with the same weapon and the experianced one would win I'd gurentee it.

DO NOT throw out experiance! it cannot and shall never be thrown out of MM, experiance matters in MM, the more experianced players win, thats how it goes, no matter your class.

But considering you keep trying to dodge the obvious that profciency matters in your equations and that I have put them to right by doing so ... your hypotheses are wrong. Fights on horseback with swords happen, a lancer would prefer his lance but without he is weaker than any other none lancer cav ... end of, facts are facts don't dismiss them or ignore them.

To first address the last point you made: I do dismiss some facts, however, I have given my reasoning for doing so, which I feel hold water. Nevertheless, I shall make a new hussar vs. lancer equation for you tomorrow.

I agree, experience counts for alot, hell, experience and proficiency are the singly most important factors in the outcome of a fight. However, when arguing about class balance you CANNOT, CANNOT, CANNOT take differing skill levels of the players into account. It flaws the reasoning into a blur with the only correct conclusion to be draw as someone has won the fight. If you take relative skill levels into account I can make a very strong case of russian militia being retardedly overpowered. Just give me two players who installed M&B 15 minutes ago and two of the top players and you can see a close to 100% win rate for the broken bottle. However, I am sure that no one thinks  that broken bottles or schytes are overpowered. I remind you, we are NOT trying to predict the outcome of fights, we are merly trying to see to what degree the outcome has been caused by the difference of power between the classes in question.

I know that I sound like a pompous, patronizing arse when I say this, but for your own sake please try to understand why this is true, because failure to do so will imensly hamper any academic, or non-academic research you ever endevour to undertake. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceteris_paribus

 

[TADER_BROS_Ltd.]

I'm trying really hard not to be an as.shole here.

But your little "model" was so contrived to begin with that insistently preaching its relevance after you've been shut down is only pushing your argument into the realm of comedy.

 

[Hekko]

I'm trying really hard not to be an as.shole here.

But your little "model" was so contrived to begin with that insistently preaching its relevance after you've been shut down is only pushing your argument into the realm of comedy.

Yet, still it is infinatley more than you have provided, which essentially are some half rude remarks and some vague comments about the consensus being that shooting at lancers is more worthwhile. The equation cannot be fundamentally wrong since it is only a mathematical way of presenting what we are arguing, what can be wrong is failure to include some factors or including erroneous ones, so I suggest this is the way you approach it.

Kator on the other hand is addressing most of my arguments atleast.

 

[BraveheartA7X]

I'm trying really hard not to be an as.shole here.

But your little "model" was so contrived to begin with that insistently preaching its relevance after you've been shut down is only pushing your argument into the realm of comedy.

Yet, still it is infinatley more than you have provided, which essentially are some half rude remarks and some vague comments about the consensus being that shooting at lancers is more worthwhile. The equation cannot be fundamentally wrong since it is only a mathematical way of presenting what we are arguing, what can be wrong is failure to include some factors or including erroneous ones, so I suggest this is the way you approach it.

You just got educated

 

[Haresus]

Its possible to make it break. Vikingr team has that.

Though I still think the most realistic option is increasing the lenght (3 meters) and making it couch only.

This actually sounds like a good idea. Lancers would be much more "Hit and run" than before since they would need to get more momentum to couch again or just using that sword of theirs; which is less dangerous than the lance, if you ask me.