Multiplayer Feedback from the Competitive Community.

Users who are viewing this thread

EbdanianAdmiral

Knight at Arms
Archery is FAR less accurate than warband. The perception that they are more accurate comes from shiields and movement being completely useless as ways to deter archers. The skill has been removed and replaced with high percentage RNG. You are less accurate but also have a much larger window to deal damage.
 

Zahari

Knight
WBNW
It is definitely more accurate. In wb I was terrible archer and here in skirmish I'm hitting more hs than body shots in wb xD
 

EbdanianAdmiral

Knight at Arms
It is definitely more accurate. In wb I was terrible archer and here in skirmish I'm hitting more hs than body shots in wb xD

Im sorry, but Im unsure how anyone with a brain can reasonably come to this conclusion. Its so easy to test. Stand 30m away from a wall and shoot at it multiple times in the same spot. Your cone of fire will be consistently larger than in warband. Many people are confusing availability of targets with accuracy and it is concerning. Shots with a bow are very easy to hit right now because people are slow moving, dodge slowly, and cannot block arrows properly with the way shields are balanced.

By saying archery is too accurate archer accuracy will just get nerfed and the problem will be unsolved. You could almost give the bows in bannerlord the accuracy of javs from warband and you could still get consistent tags on infantry because of shield and movement balance decisions.

Its frustrating to read this thread and the suggestions within because there is such an obvious solution. Just make bows fire slightly slower and make shields slightly bigger. Archers get the same accuracy, and therefore skill ceiling, with less spam, while the infantry get actual counterplay.
 

Zahari

Knight
WBNW
Im sorry, but Im unsure how anyone with a brain can reasonably come to this conclusion. Its so easy to test. Stand 30m away from a wall and shoot at it multiple times in the same spot. Your cone of fire will be consistently larger than in warband. Many people are confusing availability of targets with accuracy and it is concerning. Shots with a bow are very easy to hit right now because people are slow moving, dodge slowly, and cannot block arrows properly with the way shields are balanced.

By saying archery is too accurate archer accuracy will just get nerfed and the problem will be unsolved. You could almost give the bows in bannerlord the accuracy of javs from warband and you could still get consistent tags on infantry because of shield and movement balance decisions.

Its frustrating to read this thread and the suggestions within because there is such an obvious solution. Just make bows fire slightly slower and make shields slightly bigger. Archers get the same accuracy, and therefore skill ceiling, with less spam, while the infantry get actual counterplay.
Well I'm speaking about practical use, reticle in BL stays closed for such a long time and I can easily turn in any direction without major penalty, it's much easier for me to hit shots and hs during fights than in wb.
 

EbdanianAdmiral

Knight at Arms
Well I'm speaking about practical use, reticle in BL stays closed for such a long time and I can easily turn in any direction without major penalty that it's much easier for me to hit shots and hs during fights than in wb.

You are right. The reticle does stay closed for longer, but it still is less accurate than Warband by a ton. Being able to sit and wait for a target to become available is still a target availability issue rather than an accuracy issue.
 

Mackles

Regular
WBWF&SNWVC
I've been quite liking the shield/weapon bash mechanic. It's not fast enough to follow up with an attack like with Warband kicking but I think it's a useful tool to break up the flow of a fight, particularly where someone is trying to spam you. I think if kicking was made more viable and allowed for a follow up attack as per Warband, then this would be a good balance between the two, as kicking is a lot higher risk.
 
Everything that bothers me in Bannerlord, is pretty much summed up in this thread. Therefore i have to shout out that not being able to force a kill makes the whole game less fun by far. Even kicks are not useful at all in single combat. Also the drifting with horse is not how it should be, like mentioned in the thread.

Lets hope they read this thread and listen for once.
 

Vissy

Baron
WBNW
Well, kicking isn't high-risk if your ping is 70+. Then you can just block while you're kicking, because ping works in weird ways. Have to agree with many of the complaints raised here about the MP. Stuff feels unresponsive and imprecise. It's hard to judge what attacks will hit and what won't. Plus controlling a horse is quite annoying. I don't think it's really possible to have very skill-based cavalry dogfighting for instance in the current build.
 

EbdanianAdmiral

Knight at Arms
Well, kicking isn't high-risk if your ping is 70+. Then you can just block while you're kicking, because ping works in weird ways. Have to agree with many of the complaints raised here about the MP. Stuff feels unresponsive and imprecise. It's hard to judge what attacks will hit and what won't. Plus controlling a horse is quite annoying. I don't think it's really possible to have very skill-based cavalry dogfighting for instance in the current build.

I heavily disagree about the cav v cav. Multible cav meeting each other is an EVENT that is very impactful and usually results in a 200 dmg facestab and flipping ragdoll. The issue is most people try to play cav v cav like its warband and constantly either strafe around to get an approach angle or just sit right next to their enemy and poke from 1m away. The skill in Bannerlord cav comes from understanding lance timing and striking angles rather than treating your heavily armored horse like an F22 Raptor.

My main issue with cav atm is how they can sit on top of an infantry fight and poke for 20 damage a piece with 0 risk. Cav v infantry in groupfights does not mirror cav v cav in how it is best played, and it is frustrating to play against and unfun to partake in for either party.
 

Vissy

Baron
WBNW
So there's less skill-based elements involved then, if it's just about striking angles and lance timing. These were all a part of cavalry combat beforehand too. That's my issue.
 

xombie5

Sergeant Knight at Arms
M&BWB
Oh, just remembered that i forgot to mention - what's with being unable to draw a bow if there's a cav next to you?
I assume this is intentional, but i'm certainly not a fan of it. You get bumped out of your draw even if the guy is stationary like the old melee-archery bump.
Used to be your mind game opportunity to get your final shot in or try and dance around the cav player at close range, and force him to slow down (which was better for you) if he ****ed up his charge, rather than drawing your sword and letting him bumpstab/slash you.
Can't do that now. You have to draw your sword because your damn bow can't be used, and these swords aint exactly a deterrent. Plus jumping up to his level and stabbing/slashing is out the window. Could just be i suck at it now though - what with the attack and jump delay, probably hard to sync up.
 

Mabons

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC

Well cav can barely bumpstab now, and they are slower and less maneouverable at low speeds, so it would be a piece of piss to scoot and shoot around them if you were allowed to. It only makes consistent sense to be prevented from drawing your bow if a horse is in your face if the same happens when inf is in your face. Also, don't swing, just use overheads, for some reason they do a lot more damage, despite you hitting their chest/legs or whatever.
 

EbdanianAdmiral

Knight at Arms
So there's less skill-based elements involved then, if it's just about striking angles and lance timing. These were all a part of cavalry combat beforehand too. That's my issue.

Except there is an new swing direction and Glaives that are actually viable which shake up the cav v cav meta. New does not equal bad. Cav are still extremely capable of completely carrying. The only lance mechanics you had to keep track of in Warband were the Heavy>Regular>Light lance balance and how they relate at different angles, as well as couching length in relation to regular stabs. In Bannerlord there is a lot more to keep track of with every faction having a different set of polearms with unique stats
 

Airelhach

Baron
WBWF&SNWVC
It was a good read the main text. I haven't read the comments so I don't know if anyone else mentioned but I also would like to tell what I think about some things in-game.

- Lances and spears are too OP especially while mounted. You can still do a lot of damage without speed bonus (while standing still)
- Piercing do a lot more damage than swings. This may be because of the realism aspect of the game, therefore spears become too OP. Same thing applies for swords. If you can't deal damage to an enemy by swinging, try piercing, you'll see it deals more damage. But;
- There's hidden length of all of the one-handed weapons. Hits that shouldn't even touch the body deals damage (a lot, because it presumably touches the body where the most damage would be dealt by the weapon, i mean by the very end-point).
- I mentioned how Cav spears and lances are way too superior but I should also mention that while on ground with a spear you can't really feint or delay thus it makes a 1v1 really boring because it turns into only hit and block for a long period of time. (bot-fight) And somehow you fail to pierce the opponent very much everytime.
- Right swinging is almost as fast as left swing, so it also allows spamming without your opponent can punish you. (I don't know if its a bad thing, it may add some diversity to inf fight.) But when its added with hidden length of the weapons you can get a direct hit to your waist even while blocking.
- You have to block up with your shield, if the opponent swings above the head, otherwise it's going to be a half hit. But it also makes you vulnerable to other hits. (archer shots and right swing)
- In a 2v1 if you are using a shield and the opponents doesn't, they strangle you to spam. And there is almost nothing you can do against. Maybe its because I'm a bad player and I couldn't handle the footwork :sad: but shield makes you slower while the opponents are faster. So running isn't an option.
- I don't know how but if your opponent is angled 90 degrees to you his right swing can hit you still, it doesn't bounce on the armor. In warband it is a direct bounce.
- Aforementioned things; shield bash is useless and kills the flow of the fight, kicks as well. Upon dismounting a cav you can see him getting up quickly but if a ground troop hit by a horse it suffers a lot (takes lots of time to get up)

- Arrows are slower compared to Warband (I don't actually want to compare Bannerlord to Warband but still I need to say) In close range archers are way too accurate and can deal damage (not as much damage as an archer would want), in mid range it depends on the experience and training whether it is accurate or not (and whether it deals damage or not) and long ranges they are basically useless (even if you hit a target it deals way too less damage).
- Headshots doesn't kill. C'mon if we are going to talk about realism tell me someone who fought in a battle with an arrow in his brain. You can say that Nord and Sarranid archers might not be able to kill with a headshot in Warband. But it was actually very much depended on where you shoot at the head of the opponent. If you would shoot the helmet then it wouldn't kill but if you put that arrow in the face it would.
- At least crossbows (whether light or not) must be able to kill when its a headshot. They are basically automatic machineguns of middle age.
- Arrows get faster until some point after it is fired, after some time it loses the energy thanks to air resistance and then gets slower and eventually hit the ground. But they don't get slower while descending vice versa they get faster because of the gravity. It seemed to me that in mid range they start to lose their energy even while descending. I might be wrong about it though.

There should be other things I left out, but can't remember now. So I'm going to leave my first skirmish match's video here, for a reason of course, you can see some of the things that I mentioned above.


0:29 tell me if its hidden length or am I too close to him. (im really asking .d)
fight starts at 0:54 you can see the inconsistency of the damages.
fight starts at 1:39 if I were the one with the shield I would be strangled into spam and probably wouldn't be able to run away. And also you can see that I don't get punished (by the game) while changing from right attack direction to left and continue spamming.
2:15 headshot with a light crossbow deals 67 damage in a close range. He had been hit earlier thats how i stole the kill.

Players I played against in the video were all newbies I guess and probably they were trying multiplayer out so don't know whether the fights in the video is reliable enough.
 

Vissy

Baron
WBNW
Except there is an new swing direction and Glaives that are actually viable which shake up the cav v cav meta. New does not equal bad. Cav are still extremely capable of completely carrying. The only lance mechanics you had to keep track of in Warband were the Heavy>Regular>Light lance balance and how they relate at different angles, as well as couching length in relation to regular stabs. In Bannerlord there is a lot more to keep track of with every faction having a different set of polearms with unique stats

This is fair enough. I do think you are downplaying the mechanics involved in Warband a little bit, but no doubt I will also learn more about Bannerlord's mechanics and grow to appreciate them more as I play on. What I am hopeful about is that Bannerlord has much more significant potential to grow and develop than Warband, even if I do not enjoy the current build of the game as much as I could.
 
Last edited:

Jess_the_Hobozerk

Grandmaster Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
It was a good read the main text. I haven't read the comments so I don't know if anyone else mentioned but I also would like to tell what I think about some things in-game.

- Lances and spears are too OP especially while mounted. You can still do a lot of damage without speed bonus (while standing still)
- Piercing do a lot more damage than swings. This may be because of the realism aspect of the game, therefore spears become too OP. Same thing applies for swords. If you can't deal damage to an enemy by swinging, try piercing, you'll see it deals more damage. But;
- There's hidden length of all of the one-handed weapons. Hits that shouldn't even touch the body deals damage (a lot, because it presumably touches the body where the most damage would be dealt by the weapon, i mean by the very end-point).
- I mentioned how Cav spears and lances are way too superior but I should also mention that while on ground with a spear you can't really feint or delay thus it makes a 1v1 really boring because it turns into only hit and block for a long period of time. (bot-fight) And somehow you fail to pierce the opponent very much everytime.
- Right swinging is almost as fast as left swing, so it also allows spamming without your opponent can punish you. (I don't know if its a bad thing, it may add some diversity to inf fight.) But when its added with hidden length of the weapons you can get a direct hit to your waist even while blocking.
- You have to block up with your shield, if the opponent swings above the head, otherwise it's going to be a half hit. But it also makes you vulnerable to other hits. (archer shots and right swing)
- In a 2v1 if you are using a shield and the opponents doesn't, they strangle you to spam. And there is almost nothing you can do against. Maybe its because I'm a bad player and I couldn't handle the footwork :sad: but shield makes you slower while the opponents are faster. So running isn't an option.
- I don't know how but if your opponent is angled 90 degrees to you his right swing can hit you still, it doesn't bounce on the armor. In warband it is a direct bounce.
- Aforementioned things; shield bash is useless and kills the flow of the fight, kicks as well. Upon dismounting a cav you can see him getting up quickly but if a ground troop hit by a horse it suffers a lot (takes lots of time to get up)

- Arrows are slower compared to Warband (I don't actually want to compare Bannerlord to Warband but still I need to say) In close range archers are way too accurate and can deal damage (not as much damage as an archer would want), in mid range it depends on the experience and training whether it is accurate or not (and whether it deals damage or not) and long ranges they are basically useless (even if you hit a target it deals way too less damage).
- Headshots doesn't kill. C'mon if we are going to talk about realism tell me someone who fought in a battle with an arrow in his brain. You can say that Nord and Sarranid archers might not be able to kill with a headshot in Warband. But it was actually very much depended on where you shoot at the head of the opponent. If you would shoot the helmet then it wouldn't kill but if you put that arrow in the face it would.
- At least crossbows (whether light or not) must be able to kill when its a headshot. They are basically automatic machineguns of middle age.
- Arrows get faster until some point after it is fired, after some time it loses the energy thanks to air resistance and then gets slower and eventually hit the ground. But they don't get slower while descending vice versa they get faster because of the gravity. It seemed to me that in mid range they start to lose their energy even while descending. I might be wrong about it though.

There should be other things I left out, but can't remember now. So I'm going to leave my first skirmish match's video here, for a reason of course, you can see some of the things that I mentioned above.


0:29 tell me if its hidden length or am I too close to him. (im really asking .d)
fight starts at 0:54 you can see the inconsistency of the damages.
fight starts at 1:39 if I were the one with the shield I would be strangled into spam and probably wouldn't be able to run away. And also you can see that I don't get punished (by the game) while changing from right attack direction to left and continue spamming.
2:15 headshot with a light crossbow deals 67 damage in a close range. He had been hit earlier thats how i stole the kill.

Players I played against in the video were all newbies I guess and probably they were trying multiplayer out so don't know whether the fights in the video is reliable enough.
29 seemed a bit odd.
54, weapon sweet spots are a bit more pronounced in bannerlord than in warband. The times you dealt more damage were at a distance with the tip of your spear instead of the shaft.
139 movement is way too slow in bannerlord
215 agree, crossbows should be 1 hit kills.
 

sotamursu123

On probation
WBNW
all archers feel like sarranids - not being able to kill people in one headshot

inf feel like dismounted cav not being able to avoid legshots, only balanced by archers having low damage - legshots shouldn't happen on most inf if they're holding their shields properly and dodging properly

cav feel like inf mounted on saddlehorses with no riding skill
 
Top Bottom