New Update Killed Lancers?

[Spanky89]

I noticed this new update made lancing seriously hard, lancing now causes ALOT less dmg compared to before.. before one could do 1 hit kill, now its more like 2-3 hit kills.... even att full speed at direct hit at the player...

i think it sucks

caus it makes me suck :/

anyway i making a poll, what do you think about this new anti lancing update?

Anyone else noticed that lancing become harder?

 

[Kleidophoros]

you mean couch lancing or lancepoking?
if lance poking then get your game up; its not fair to kill dudes with 1 hit.

also

i think it sucks

caus it makes me suck :/

yeah...try different strateies then...

 

[Spanky89]

lancepoking is impossible now

 

[UsF]

Sounds fine to me. If you are at high speed, you should be couching and not lancepoking. Wasn't the fix I had in mind, but seems to be fine. (I would stil want to have lancepoking at high speeds disabled and only allow couching).

Lancepoking should not be the rule, but the exception (if you are slow enough, circling an infantrymen or archer).

I voted yes (lancer) since I can be both, infantry and lancer. 

 

[Lord Rust]

That seems kinda lame, when you're lancing you should be going at full speed straight at the target for max damage, if you need 3 hits to kill a guy like that you're not gonna get many kills at all, because by the time you've reined in your horse and are going back to the target, someons going to have killed him.

Add into that how laughably simple it is to kill horses, charging three times at a guy to kill him isn't going to leave many players -left- on their horse

Blade and manual-block-elitism - All new from Taleworlds

Because whining helps

 

[Emciel]

damage has been slightly reduced across the board due to the armour being made more effective.
also it now takes more hits to take down a horse (when it's charging and you thrust (with a sword)), even the saddle horse has required a couple of hits for me now.

 

[Gabeed]

I like it.  The situation before was that no one would use a one hander on horseback.  This was due to horses being weak, and because everyone was using the crazy one-hit-kill-even-when-trotting-nonchalantly lances.  With horses now being much stronger, I think making lances slightly less dangerous makes sense.  I actually enjoy playing cavalry now, because you can often actually wade through non-spear infantry with your one handed weapon, chopping off heads . . . rather than having to be a wuss, lancing even archers at oblique angles in order to stay as far away as possible to protect your courser.

Oh, and I"m still getting 1-hit killed by lances all the time, so I'm basing this off what the OP is saying, not my personal experiences.

 

[Ellendar]

That seems kinda lame, when you're lancing you should be going at full speed straight at the target for max damage, if you need 3 hits to kill a guy like that you're not gonna get many kills at all, because by the time you've reined in your horse and are going back to the target, someons going to have killed him.

Well if you want to go with the logical argument if you tried to "stab" with  a lance at someone at full speed you would break your wrist.  It's one of the reason that couching a lance was designed.  Now I know the game isn't supposed to be a perfect simulator, but I do think that this is a more appropriate way to have this game designed.  The same applies for riding very fast and stabbing 90 degrees to the side, this would also break a person wrist.  Also at the exception when done properly there was no effective counter to lance poking other than carrying a ranged weapon. 

 

[Lord Rust]

Bringing rl into game design is a daft idea.

But if this is just the 7% reduction and nothing else than thats not really an issue tbh, I still lance just fine though it's a lot harder than before (7% matters a lot).

 

[Sir Bogan]

I've got no problem with lance poking now....

I killed at least 3 horsemen with a crossbow in a match tonight....

 

[Ellendar]

Bringing rl into game design is a daft idea.

But if this is just the 7% reduction and nothing else than thats not really an issue tbh, I still lance just fine though it's a lot harder than before (7% matters a lot).

I  said that the game is not a true simulator, but one of mount and blade's signatures is that it is fairly realistic compared to most games.  Mount and blade was based around having a weighty combat system that felt more realistic than say a flippy jumpy Jedi knockoff game.  Also the logic behind the huge couched damage vs. the lesser poking damage is when couched you can get the full momentum of the horse and rider behind your attack.  When poking one would have to "give in" with one's arm on impact of end up with a broken wrist, or the weapon torn from you hand. 

Once again I'm not saying we need a true simulator, but if mount and blade looses too much of its pseudo-realistic sim style it will lose what sets it apart from every other fighting game. 

 

[Lord Rust]

Bringing rl into game design is a daft idea.

But if this is just the 7% reduction and nothing else than thats not really an issue tbh, I still lance just fine though it's a lot harder than before (7% matters a lot).

I  said that the game is not a true simulator, but one of mount and blade's signatures is that it is fairly realistic compared to most games.  Mount and blade was based around having a weighty combat system that felt more realistic than say a flippy jumpy Jedi knockoff game.  Also the logic behind the huge couched damage vs. the lesser poking damage is when couched you can get the full momentum of the horse and rider behind your attack.  When poking one would have to "give in" with one's arm on impact of end up with a broken wrist, or the weapon torn from you hand. 

Once again I'm not saying we need a true simulator, but if mount and blade looses too much of its pseudo-realistic sim style it will lose what sets it apart from every other fighting game.

You're silly, go away.

 

[Kleidophoros]

Bringing rl into game design is a daft idea.

But if this is just the 7% reduction and nothing else than thats not really an issue tbh, I still lance just fine though it's a lot harder than before (7% matters a lot).

I  said that the game is not a true simulator, but one of mount and blade's signatures is that it is fairly realistic compared to most games.  Mount and blade was based around having a weighty combat system that felt more realistic than say a flippy jumpy Jedi knockoff game.  Also the logic behind the huge couched damage vs. the lesser poking damage is when couched you can get the full momentum of the horse and rider behind your attack.  When poking one would have to "give in" with one's arm on impact of end up with a broken wrist, or the weapon torn from you hand. 

Once again I'm not saying we need a true simulator, but if mount and blade looses too much of its pseudo-realistic sim style it will lose what sets it apart from every other fighting game.

You're silly, go away.

actually you are silly.

 

[Ellendar]

Bringing rl into game design is a daft idea.

But if this is just the 7% reduction and nothing else than thats not really an issue tbh, I still lance just fine though it's a lot harder than before (7% matters a lot).

I  said that the game is not a true simulator, but one of mount and blade's signatures is that it is fairly realistic compared to most games.  Mount and blade was based around having a weighty combat system that felt more realistic than say a flippy jumpy Jedi knockoff game.  Also the logic behind the huge couched damage vs. the lesser poking damage is when couched you can get the full momentum of the horse and rider behind your attack.  When poking one would have to "give in" with one's arm on impact of end up with a broken wrist, or the weapon torn from you hand. 

Once again I'm not saying we need a true simulator, but if mount and blade looses too much of its pseudo-realistic sim style it will lose what sets it apart from every other fighting game.

You're silly, go away.

Why is that a silly argument, if we wanted to play a multiplayer legend of zelda there are plenty options for that, mount and blade fills a niche for a different style of combat simulators. 

 

[Urist]

The reason why lance thrusts aren't as effective in full gallop anymore isn't the 7% reduce.
The effect of the  speed bonus for an attack has been lowered.

 

[Lord Rust]

I just tested, working just fine.

Played one death match game and I got the usual barrage of insults and threats from the usual people, I mean how dare I use a horse. so yeah, it's fine, harder than before sure but working just fine.

 

[Spanky89]

The reason why lance thrusts aren't as effective in full gallop anymore isn't the 7% reduce.
The effect of the  speed bonus for an attack has been lowered.

Yeah thats the biggest problem... :/

i dont get coucing... i havent ever killed anyone with coucing dont get it at all... is coucing reach just as far as poking?

i used to have 50 kills to 10 deaths when playing lancer before

now its more like 10 deaths 15 kills :/ , if i fail i guess there is no overpowered lancer anymore :/

lancing used to be overpowered in medevil times... cav was always the strongest part of a army... i dont think destroying lancing is the best solution... better to make lancing cost twice the money!!!

that way we get less lancers.... but still those manage to save up for a lance are showing the true powers of cavlery vs infantry.

 

[kingofnoobia]

I played a deathmatch when the patch was out, a lancer was leading the board all of the time. And it really was only lancing, on foot he didn't even care to block anything, he just wildly swung his sword about (and I actually died by that once , though on foot I killed him 95% of the time). First time I had an awlpike, I could beat him, but second round I was nord with my longest weapon being a Warspear, and he used the Jousting lance, and he seemed to be rather good at anticipating dodges. And he was poking, not couching.

So I voted that lancers aren't underpowered now. I still get killed in good armor by a single blow, much to my annoyance, and lancers are still capable of leading the scoreboard. It could be though because I played deathmatch, where the chaos often works to their advantage. A prepared line in battle will be harder to attack I presume.

BTW spanky, lancing itself wasn't overpowering. It was the people on the horses. They wore the best armor, got the best training, ... etc. Lancing simply allowed them to use all that to full potential, as it gives them the initiative, and such a dangerous tactic was allowed by their good armor. Even if you are right and I am wrong, it shouldn't be that way in the game.

edit: btw, I think you were playing along with us in that server... The player I meant was RussianLiberation, I think you joined too for a while (I know I killed you a few times in field by the river ). So you could see for yourself that lancing isn't underpowered. But most lancers are using the normal lances, not the jousting lances, I'd advise to try them.

another edit: goddammit, I accidently pressed 'no', I read the thread title 'New Update Killed Lancers?', and pressed no without reading the question...

 

[Gabeed]

lancing used to be overpowered in medevil times...

And it should be such in a game?  Really?

 

[HTAPAWASO]

I think that at full gallop, a lance thrust from horseback should kill an unarmoured person pretty much all the time.

Reducing the speed bonus was a mistake I believe - speed bonus should be more important, with less base damage from lancing to compensate. That way we don't have ridiculous sideways pokes while at a trot doing the same damage as a forward thrust at full speed.