[multiplayer] You call 1.143 patch "balanced" ?

[Kneed]

Are you serious ? I think developers should really start playing this game. You buffed Sweden the most in 1.143 - whose idea was that ? Improve Swedish musketeers accuracy (from 180 to 190), add 5 ironflesh (from 4 to 9) to Swedish Infrantry ?
Decrease Cossacks accuracy from 180 to 130 ?!
So far there were 2 factions with same accuracy (180), right now there is only one - buffed to 190 Sweden. Even before this patch everyone wanted to play Sweden, and you buffed it ? This is just ridiculous !

Before this patch Cossacks had JUST musketeers. So what Cossacks have now ? They don't have infrantry, they don't have musketeers, and they don't have calvary. Who will play them then ?
Sweden has by far best musketeers and best infrantry right now and you call this balance changes ?

PS. Sorry for so many question marks, but this patch is completely unbalanced ! It looks like some person who knows NOTHING about multiplayer made those changes.

Spot on assessment!

I see no reason not to use the same stats from the SP game, Lifeguard (Vet) IF 4, 58hp, 150 Firearms. 

I rarely if ever see any servers using Cossacks, I guess devs felt rarely was far too often as they have been rendered completely useless.

 

[Kneed]

If WFaS is going to stay somewhat true to its historical setting, then firearms will be fairly dominant.. field battles will be mostly musketeers and cavalry, sieges will be mostly musketeers and infantry.

As some point historical accuracy has to give way to an making a marketable game. 

For the sake of historical accuracy give Cossacks and the Khanate more troops than the opposition, historically they won by fielding superior numbers of inferior troops.  Either a 3/2 or 4/3 player advantage should do.

 

[Cleomenes]

Are you serious ? I think developers should really start playing this game. You buffed Sweden the most in 1.143 - whose idea was that ? Improve Swedish musketeers accuracy (from 180 to 190), add 5 ironflesh (from 4 to 9) to Swedish Infrantry ?
Decrease Cossacks accuracy from 180 to 130 ?!
So far there were 2 factions with same accuracy (180), right now there is only one - buffed to 190 Sweden. Even before this patch everyone wanted to play Sweden, and you buffed it ? This is just ridiculous !

Before this patch Cossacks had JUST musketeers. So what Cossacks have now ? They don't have infrantry, they don't have musketeers, and they don't have calvary. Who will play them then ?
Sweden has by far best musketeers and best infrantry right now and you call this balance changes ?

PS. Sorry for so many question marks, but this patch is completely unbalanced ! It looks like some person who knows NOTHING about multiplayer made those changes.

Of course Sweden got buffed. They are way overpowered.

 

[ArkadiuszB]

Things I think should be changed after 1.142:

Poland:
- increase Calvary lance damage
- add some 2h weapon to Polish Infrantry
- increase Infrantry HP
- increase Calvary HP

Muscovite (haven't played Calvary, can't say much about them):
- increase Infrantry HP
- (probably) increase Calvary HP

Sweden (haven't played Calvary, can't say much about them):
- decrease Musketeers accuracy (from 180 to about 160)
- decrease Musketeers HP (should die in 1 hit from other nations good muskets)
- increase Infrantry HP
- (probably) increase Calvary HP

Cossacks (haven't played Calvary, can't say much about them):
- Cossacks Riflemans needs some changes - they were useless, Infrantry were real musketeers. Cossacks don't have melee fighters at all.
IMO, if you want to leave Cossacks without melee fighters, they should be best musketeers (180 accuracy, like in 1.142 patch, but with decreased Swedish accuracy they should be best in range fights).

Khanates (haven't played Lancer, can't say much about them):
- Archers shouldn't be able to use fast horses (saddle horse is good enough for them)
- Number of arrows should be decreased (from 30 to 20-25 per quiver)
- Bows should make much less damage (best bows are definatelly too good)
- Yataghan speed should be decreased

Overall:
- Horses should recieve only half damage from range weapons (bullets, arrows)
- Decrease muskets reloading speed a bit (2-3 points)

BTW: I hope multiplayer balance changes in patch 1.143 were made just "by mistake". They are crazy !

Poland-Lithuania:
- Polish Commonwealth renamed to Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth

Nope. Rename it to Poland instead.

(Inb4 little lithuanian kid raging at me, or calling me an idiot  )

 

[Leaffordes]

Historically speaking, in 17th century the swedish had best infantry and best musketeers. The cossacks are widely known for their fighters heart and riding skills. So, on the one side, the multiplayer may not been balanced well, but on the other side it is historically accurate. Many times I was thinking what is the best, but I understand that no one can make a product which will be liked by anyone. So let Taleworld do their thing and implement their visions, else there will be more "do-nothing" patches that simply rebalance things from side to side

Historically speaking ...
The Battle of Kircholm (27 September 1605 )
Look at strenght & casualties for both sides
So they were not so good.

Ha-ha, "they were not so good" and still they conquered a lot of land, you're basically raping Poland by saying this.. And by the way, that battle took place in 1605 which of the "With Fire and Sword" conflict took place in 1655 and that's indeed the war we should discuss, nore we shouldn't even discuss that war but this game, the balance of it, nothing else. You can't really judge them of how good they were in the 17th century only by "The Battle of Kircholm". I tell you what, go read some about the"Second Northern war" and then come back here, tell me what you found and write me in PM.. What you will find is that they were not any "not-so-good" guys, they were pretty skilled back there.,

Ha-ha. Double-up Laughs, you're dead

 

[Yazzy]

I got my squirrel ear to this here thread, just letting you guys know.

 

[Ans99]

My proposal is the Miquelet Musket for the Polish Musketeer. The infantry is very weak. This is evident especially during sieges ( weakest in game ). Muscovites have at least 2h-weapons. Sweden has both ( 2h weapons and muskets ) etc.

 

[Adijazz1706]

In open battle, the Crimean Horse Archers are overpowered as they move so fast it is difficult to shoot them. They also have great rate of fire with their bows!

 

[RalliX]

I just had a tough game against the Crimeans on Siege. It seems a bane to my hatchetry has been found: Mass ranged weapons.
The entire enemy team of Khanate was using either bows or guns. It really sucked because Moscovites don't get any form of shield for their footmen.

Yazzy, if you are listening, I would suggest functional moving pavises/mantlets during sieges. They would be balanced by being able to be destroyed by melee weaponry. It is reaaally painful to have rushed halfway across the map after respawning, only to get completely wiped out by enemy fire once you get to an entrance... every spawn.

 

[Abelardo]

If WFaS is going to stay somewhat true to its historical setting, then firearms will be fairly dominant.. field battles will be mostly musketeers and cavalry, sieges will be mostly musketeers and infantry.

As some point historical accuracy has to give way to an making a marketable game. 

For the sake of historical accuracy give Cossacks and the Khanate more troops than the opposition, historically they won by fielding superior numbers of inferior troops.  Either a 3/2 or 4/3 player advantage should do.

Indeed, keep historical accuracy in the SP portion, the MP HAS to be balanced, it's really mind boggling why they would decide to buff something that already had an advantage.

 

[RalliX]

I really don't see what you guys are getting at. I find the Swedes to frankly be the easiest opponents right now.

 

[Ans99]

Historically speaking, in 17th century the swedish had best infantry and best musketeers. The cossacks are widely known for their fighters heart and riding skills. So, on the one side, the multiplayer may not been balanced well, but on the other side it is historically accurate. Many times I was thinking what is the best, but I understand that no one can make a product which will be liked by anyone. So let Taleworld do their thing and implement their visions, else there will be more "do-nothing" patches that simply rebalance things from side to side

Historically speaking ...
The Battle of Kircholm (27 September 1605 )
Look at strenght & casualties for both sides
So they were not so good.

Ha-ha, "they were not so good" and still they conquered a lot of land, you're basically raping Poland by saying this.. And by the way, that battle took place in 1605 which of the "With Fire and Sword" conflict took place in 1655 and that's indeed the war we should discuss, nore we shouldn't even discuss that war but this game, the balance of it, nothing else. You can't really judge them of how good they were in the 17th century only by "The Battle of Kircholm". I tell you what, go read some about the"Second Northern war" and then come back here, tell me what you found and write me in PM.. What you will find is that they were not any "not-so-good" guys, they were pretty skilled back there.,

Ha-ha. Double-up Laughs, you're dead

Basicly, Poland has surrender ( without fight - province by province ) . The Swedes won, until the Poles did not fight. This situation ( conquer) persisted until the looting started.
Simplifying of course.
You know the end of the story, so give me one example Swedes victory though similar in size to their defeat at Kirholm

But it's not the point, I mean that in the game are disproportionately good compared to the rest.

 

[Osviux]

I guess the swedes are the nords of WF&S.  Doesn't look like it's going to change.

Why do you people think that the nords are soo good? They are lame.

Because regardless of your personal feelings,  they have the highest stats and the best overall items in general,  especially in siege.  Large strong shields,  heavy damage long range shield breaking axes,  good archers.  The only thing they lack is heavy cavalry but any team can make due unless its an open plains map.

I dont know about their stats, but the shields are lame. You can easily shot a nord into the legs. Also their archers are lame. Vaegirs are more better and Rhodok Crossbowmen are the best ranged unit. They have big shields that cover all the body and hammers that can easily kill a nord with his big round shield up so the Rhodoks dont have to break their shields. Nord one handed axes are short.

I am referring to multiplayer.

Also am I. The only reason nords are good is that they break shields with their axes. But i usualy use a hammer so i dont care. And i dont even have to break their shields. It actually depends on class and faction. If i had to fight a nord as a sarranid or veagir archer or a swadian crossbowmen i would be in trouble, but if i had to be sarranid infantry, rhodok crossbowman or sergeant, a swadian man at arms or a khergit i would totally own him.

 

[Yazzy]

Gentle folk,  I'm reading this thread still and I've posted my class guide.

It contains info on how each class in each faction is supposed to play and with your commentary and our desire to make better and better MP experiences I think whenever the next patch comes out(have no idea when, bear in mind) we'll be able to make even better changes and balances to the factions.

It's really in my personal interest to make sure every faction is fun and usable whilst being unique and not given all the same talents or weapons.  Having said that, I still want to make an effort to improve things even more. 

Regardless if you feel this latest balance is cool, a step in the right direction, or a complete laugh job, PLEASE let my viking squirrel know.

Cheers from Turkey and Thanks everyone.

http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?topic=182943.new#new

 

[Must]

Historically speaking, in 17th century the swedish had best infantry and best musketeers. The cossacks are widely known for their fighters heart and riding skills. So, on the one side, the multiplayer may not been balanced well, but on the other side it is historically accurate. Many times I was thinking what is the best, but I understand that no one can make a product which will be liked by anyone. So let Taleworld do their thing and implement their visions, else there will be more "do-nothing" patches that simply rebalance things from side to side

Historically speaking ...
The Battle of Kircholm (27 September 1605 )
Look at strenght & casualties for both sides
So they were not so good.

a very long time I did not see the server (or game) without the Swedes.
This fraction is much too strong compared to others. Have much better weapons and stats (which is not justified practically nothing)
When there's a map without this fraction for the moment someone vote for change. I had hoped that this will change with the patch, but I see that these were vain hopes. It is worse.

sorry for lng

Yeah, about the battle of Kircholm, wikipedia says that nearly half the Swedish force concisted of mercenaries + they were fighting against a nearly all-cavalry Hussar army.
Sorry for offtopic, but yes, Sweden was overpowered historically too, having to rely on skill and armour rather than numbers (yes, i know that they outnumbered the poles at kircholm).
Sorry for offtopic and my bad English, you see, my native language is... Swedish.

 

[Leaffordes]

MP: This is how it should be if I were to choose.

Sweden: + Best Firearms/skill, good armors, decent meele weapons (They have the best meele weapons now).
              - Worsest Horses/skill, bad meele weapon skills, second worst athletics (Khanate being worst). [NO BOW]

Cossacks: + Best Ironflesh/athletics stats, good Firearms/meele weapon skills, decent horses/skill(INCREASED).               
                - Worsest Meele weapons, bad archer skills, second worst armors (Khanate being worst).

Polish CW: + Best Armors, good meele weapons,horse/ skill, decent Firearms,bow/skill, decent horses skill.                       
                  - Worsest Ironflesh stats, third best horses (Khanate and Muscovite better)

Muscovite: + Best Meele weapons/skill, good bows,horse/skills, decent Armors. ironflesh,athletics skills.               
                -  Second worst firearms/skills (Khanate being worst)

Khanate: + Best Horses,bow/skills, good meele weapons/skills, decent ironflesh skills.
              - Worsest Firearms,athletics skills. Bad cavalryarmor (infantry should have better)

ALSO: Make Firearms slightly worser then what they are now.

Nevermind my post I actually think it's quite balanced as it is good job Taleworlds, only thing that is missing is to rebalance the firearms, make them slightly worser and it should be a blast.

 

[Majestic7]

I mainly play sieges and battles with 40+ people. Sweden is clearly overpowered. They can be beaten, sure, but they outclass every other faction. I've stopped playing them, because it feels like exploiting the game.

It would be fun to see other kind of balancing effects than tweaking stats. For example, keep Swedes overpowered one to one to their counterparts... Instead give them half the amount of men compared to attackers while defending in sieges, for example. Likewise, Muscovites could be even crappier than now, but get more soldiers than the opponents. That would be fun and interesting in mass battles.

A shame that big weapons can be used in contricted spaces. If two-handed swords were impossible to use in small rooms, that would already nerf Swedes a lot. I suspect that is something no patch can change, though, engine question.

edit - I think firearms are fine as it is, though. Historically, they were used in mass volleys against massed enemies. This never happens in the multiplayer, you are shooting at individual targets. This is pretty unhistorical way to use the guns in a battle, but that is the nature of multiplayer. Thus higher accuracy than historical is okay so the guns are still useful. If firearms are not deadly, they become pointless. Even now, armored enemies can usually take two musket balls. If that turned into always two, sometimes three to four... What would be the point anymore? Guns would be just crappier than bows in every regard.

 

[Leaffordes]

You see, if firearms were to be nerfed Sweden wouldn't be that overpowered anymore.

Accuracy - nerfed (This one shouldn't be changed that much, just a little)
Range - nerfed (Without changing the damage of it, it was great as it was before the 41? patch even though it was not as powerful as it is now.)

Better firearms should have bigger changes to them, with this I mean that the rusty musket shouldn't be changed that much but the miquelet should.

I know many of you will probably disagree but the most of you will probably be the ones camping all the time with these Miquelets muskets and this isn't fun in the long turn. If you think twice, it's more funnier to kill someone when it's actually a challenge to it..

 

[Majestic7]

Nerfing Miquelet would only make Cossacks even worse and they suck already; they've actually become worse than the Crimeans now. The trouble with Swedish musketeers is not Miquelets, but the insane shooting skills the musketeer class has.

 

[Knight of the Rose]

I guess the swedes are the nords of WF&S.  Doesn't look like it's going to change.

Why do you people think that the nords are soo good? They are lame.

Because regardless of your personal feelings,  they have the highest stats and the best overall items in general,  especially in siege.  Large strong shields,  heavy damage long range shield breaking axes,  good archers.  The only thing they lack is heavy cavalry but any team can make due unless its an open plains map.

I dont know about their stats, but the shields are lame. You can easily shot a nord into the legs. Also their archers are lame. Vaegirs are more better and Rhodok Crossbowmen are the best ranged unit. They have big shields that cover all the body and hammers that can easily kill a nord with his big round shield up so the Rhodoks dont have to break their shields. Nord one handed axes are short.

I am referring to multiplayer.

Also am I. The only reason nords are good is that they break shields with their axes. But i usualy use a hammer so i dont care. And i dont even have to break their shields. It actually depends on class and faction. If i had to fight a nord as a sarranid or veagir archer or a swadian crossbowmen i would be in trouble, but if i had to be sarranid infantry, rhodok crossbowman or sergeant, a swadian man at arms or a khergit i would totally own him.

*shrugs* You are entitled to your opinion I guess.  Most of the rest of the community,  as well as I would probably disagree with you.