Possible Simple Solution to Captain Mode Delaying Silliness: Overwhelming Odds Multiplier

Users who are viewing this thread

Sigaretovic

Squire
Until they improve the AI, they situation will not change, you are asking for people to not take cavarly. As i tried to explain before right now the AI could not be lead in battle with actual result, and you "solution" is quite easy to exploit, i just need to go back to them before the time run out and reposition them in the same spot or reposition them around the map as the match progress.


I don't know why you should resort to insult people when they don't share your opinion.
Want the team to all play together? Than a good cavalry player role is not to fight melee with you, it is to take flag, disturb they enemy archer, kill enemy cavalry, eventually cover your team archer retreat.

Maybe join my team the next time for some games and see how we play before going around making assumption on people mental health
I stepped on your soul did i? Im sorry ?

I'm not arguing that cav should hug the infantry or Archer all the time. Im arguing against the abuse of cavalry in captain mode.

Let me explain what i mean by abuse: park your squad in a corner, play by yourself, die, take the next unit which you respawn as, repeat 10 times. Still don't understand how annoying that is for the rest of the team and also for the other team.

Thank you for your offer, but i do get it how captain is supposed to be played.
 

Mabons

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Maybe join my team the next time for some games and see how we play before going around making assumption on people mental health

Literally every person I've seen advocating for cavalry rambo tactic to stay is someone who plays with their clan every time. Try playing solo and see how annoying it is when you can't call your friends to help fend off that one twat on a horse.
 

Wayne2077

Recruit
Thank you for your offer, but i do get it how captain is supposed to be played.
It should be played your way apparently.
All competitive games when patched used pro-stage players experience/comments, not those solo players in low MMR since they don't understand the game as good as they should for proposing any quality remarks without destroying the game completely.

If something annoy you it doesn't mean that the game is bad, in most of the cases it's because you don't know how to play it properly and adapt to the enemy tactics. A toxic person will always be annoyed, no mater of what game he plays, whether he win or lose.

Try playing solo
I did many times and only new players complain (even when your score is x5 to theirs), basically you always carrying your team when playing solo. But I'm not crying here why I'm getting bad players with me in the team, because I know why and know why they can't separate it with pro players.
 

Moton

Knight
Until they improve the AI, they situation will not change, you are asking for people to not take cavarly. As i tried to explain before right now the AI could not be lead in battle with actual result, and you "solution" is quite easy to exploit, i just need to go back to them before the time run out and reposition them in the same spot or reposition them around the map as the match progress.

Main problem isn't cav users who dont want to kill of all their units but rather cav people who extend every match with 20 minutes. Also Cav is a support unit and not a killing unit, A cav troop riding through the enemies when the fight starts between the foot soldiers to break formations and such is their actual job. Not running around trying to get solo kills while having zero impact on the game.

This is exactly why I only play full team nowdays so I can play with cav players that know what their role on the field is and they are damn effective and good at it resulting in a super high win rate.
 

Zarthas

Knight at Arms
The core issue here is not really rambo cav, as I said in my original post, the core issue here is delaying behavior, which is exacerbated by jerks who play rambo cav.

You've never seen me complain about solo cav in general because personally I don't care a whole lot. It is a valid, if somewhat annoying, strategy for a good player and it will not go away. It means they're going to be playing a long game hoping to whittle down your troops enough that their allies can take you in a brawl.

Gameplay-wise a counter does exist, take a bunch of pikes, a bunch of rabble for body count, and play extremely aggressively. Horse Gang and Glassd are good examples of great solo cav players, but they absolutely do not win every game I play against them. If they do win, it is usually a case of my team doing very foolish things (Stop taking Sharpshooters when fighting Glaive cav plz, it will take him 20 seconds to destroy your unit when you are standing 100m from your allies) rather than the game being broken.



What is "broken", serves no purpose, and should be resolved is the ability of a player with 3 horseman to run around in circles for 4 minutes while the other team of 60 pikes and heavies just has a dance party at the flag.
I like dance parties but there are other games for that.
 

Spottswoode

Veteran
(even when your score is x5 to theirs), basically you always carrying your team when playing solo.
Once the main fight has finished and after your team already lost the ground troop fight while the cav player is running around blindly stabbing people... having a high kill count isn't carrying the team... unless you kill every single enemy left. Its quite possible you missed a critical moment where a full unit of cav charging at the right time could have swung the momentum of the fight in your teams favour. (split up an infantry charge, saved your archers from getting chased down, capped and held morale to force the enemy out of position, drew a unit of infantry away from the main fight giving your team an advantage, sitting on 2 units of archers with all your horses while your team is free to fight without being shot) so many things can be happening that can swing the fight massively.

In saying that Horsegang absolutely clutched the match for us in a 3v3 the other day when the enemy was left with rabble, killed lots of dudes on the flag before morale ran out and got the win. But Horsegang is actively working on strategy as well during the fight, supporting his archers (me) and then resuming capping flags and solo killing. Not just wearing blinkers (pun intended) and searching for random kills as so many solo cav players do.

I'm not saying you do or don't do any of those things, i'm not sure if I have fought with you b4, but if you have played captain lots then you must see it happening and understand the frustration here.
 

Spottswoode

Veteran
The core issue here is not really rambo cav, as I said in my original post, the core issue here is delaying behavior, which is exacerbated by jerks who play rambo cav.

You've never seen me complain about solo cav in general because personally I don't care a whole lot. It is a valid, if somewhat annoying, strategy for a good player and it will not go away. It means they're going to be playing a long game hoping to whittle down your troops enough that their allies can take you in a brawl.

Gameplay-wise a counter does exist, take a bunch of pikes, a bunch of rabble for body count, and play extremely aggressively. Horse Gang and Glassd are good examples of great solo cav players, but they absolutely do not win every game I play against them. If they do win, it is usually a case of my team doing very foolish things (Stop taking Sharpshooters when fighting Glaive cav plz, it will take him 20 seconds to destroy your unit when you are standing 100m from your allies) rather than the game being broken.



What is "broken", serves no purpose, and should be resolved is the ability of a player with 3 horseman to run around in circles for 4 minutes while the other team of 60 pikes and heavies just has a dance party at the flag.
I like dance parties but there are other games for that.
Sorry to further derail above. agree 100%
 

Super Jew

Sergeant
WBNWVC
Those far and few between times someone does actually clutch is not worth the many many many times it's just some twat who can't even ride the horse in a straight line without bumping into stuff. It's just painful.
Cavalry needs to be played for the long con. Cavalry at the moment provides long term value and can't be rushed. People rush their cavalry units off spawn all the time and what happens? They die with no return for their death. As annoying as it might be to watch someone try and clutch for a couple of minutes that is the best way for those players to improve. I had never played M&B multiplayer before EA and sucked at cavalry at first. I played cavalry always getting my ass beat until I got better. Why shouldn't other players have that opportunity?
Then you'd better try to pull of a 20v1 before your team is wiped, not after.

Riding around as cav and picking off AI troops is also not necessarily a sign of skill with the current AI.
I'm not saying that winning a 20v1 is about my ego, it's about winning the round like everyone is trying to do. Also, who says that I'm just killing braindead AI during the opportunities to clutch?

Last person ramboing cavalry is not worse then the lonely shield infantry player on the other side of the map in square formation not helping in the fight.
 

Cek

Knight
Maybe it just my wrong assumption, but i think most of you who advocate for a cavalry that charge the enemy at the start to "break" enemy formation doesn't ever actually play cavalry in captain mode, and base his view on RTS game, where usually it is one of his role.
Next game try to take cavalry and do that, you will probably see that all your cav will be stopped by enemy units and killed without doing much damage, the match will be faster, but you were quite useless in it.

I'm not advocating in defence of trolls who run around without even try to fight (it could be done with infantry too) or the one who still try to win alone against 3 full spear unit groups, but it seems that from most people good and bad cavalry player are see at the same level (someone to complain to for the loss), maybe one day the Ai will be competent enough for bring them with you.

This is exactly why I only play full team nowdays so I can play with cav players that know what their role on the field is and they are damn effective and good at it resulting in a super high win rate.

To be fair, when you play in a team against totaly random people, what you pick doesn't matter because you can comunicate with your team mates and that alone it is already a huge advantage.
 

Zarthas

Knight at Arms
Cavalry needs to be played for the long con. Cavalry at the moment provides long term value and can't be rushed. People rush their cavalry units off spawn all the time and what happens? They die with no return for their death. As annoying as it might be to watch someone try and clutch for a couple of minutes that is the best way for those players to improve. I had never played M&B multiplayer before EA and sucked at cavalry at first. I played cavalry always getting my ass beat until I got better. Why shouldn't other players have that opportunity?

I'm not saying that winning a 20v1 is about my ego, it's about winning the round like everyone is trying to do. Also, who says that I'm just killing braindead AI during the opportunities to clutch?

Last person ramboing cavalry is not worse then the lonely shield infantry player on the other side of the map in square formation not helping in the fight.
I get what you're saying on the one hand, what I'm saying is that I don't think that is the prime Bannerlord multiplayer experience. The prime Bannerlord Captain experience is the maneuver before engagement, false retreats, arrow storms, that kind of thing, not everyone watching one guy lance peasants until the timer runs out.

If you're arguing for keeping unwinnable clutches like that, I absolutely 10000% disagree. We're delaying 5-8 players playing the game for the benefit of one guy, who is only getting better at playing a very very narrow piece of the game. They're kinda neat when they do happen, for sure, but it is not worth the cost. This kind of thing is absolutely contributing to player population being low.

I do no want to provide more space to train new players that this is how you play the game, I want that space to disappear entirely.

Absolutely agree that some rando milling around over on A with his Legions is a jerk too, and this system would penalize them as well, and would help with any other delaying troll behavior.
 
Last edited:

Brandis.

Subforum Moderator
A cav player with 3 units left vs 20 infantry could very well be in favor of the cav.

The morale change makes sense mechanically and realistically (not that realism is ever a great argument in videogames), as long as it's not too severe it'd work well enough. Maybe optional and enabled for public servers would be a good idea, and disabled by default in team matches.
 

Zarthas

Knight at Arms
A cav player with 3 units left vs 20 infantry could very well be in favor of the cav.

The morale change makes sense mechanically and realistically (not that realism is ever a great argument in videogames), as long as it's not too severe it'd work well enough. Maybe optional and enabled for public servers would be a good idea, and disabled by default in team matches.
Yeah, could possibly be, but we're not talking strictly cav and more about scenarios where we are 3 v 50 or 4 vs 80 and are very obviously unwinnable. Basing it on "Troop Cost" rather than just body count would help to make sure Cav isn't considered "Outnumbered" unfairly.

Absolutely, devs should play around with the numbers to see what feels good, but it seems mechanically and thematically reasonable as you say.

Frankly, I'm desperate to do anything that'll improve and retain player population at this point.
 

Moton

Knight
To be fair, when you play in a team against totaly random people, what you pick doesn't matter because you can comunicate with your team mates and that alone it is already a huge advantage.

I rarely play vs randoms. As you can see in another post I posted in "Casuals roar: we are sad" I wrote I hate that the game is to easy and need matchmaking etc. I mostly play full in-house, 6vs6 a clan I'm good friends with or said clan vs another clan.

I have 700h hours in captain alone and over 2000 hours Warband multiplayer. I understand the basics of the game mate, ofcourse a full clan wins over some randoms.
 

Bloc

Archduke
WB
1. Solo Rambo cav doing silly things like refusing to use their troops, and therefore not really contributing to the match if the teams are playing aggressively.
I was just playing and rage quit because of this. There were 3 people from same clan, all cav, doing ramboing. This is not clans vs random people. This is buzzkillers vs random people. That **** is seriously problematic and not fun.
If they wanna play PvP they can play PvP. If they wanna play Ai vs Human, they can go and play Singleplayer.
Making your troops wait and trying couched charge is pathetic beyond reasoning. I'm not even talking about delaying of the game/match - it's literally killing the fun for other players. They should find a way to get rid of this.
 

MP_Erik

Sergeant
M&BWBWF&SNW
I'm not advocating in defence of trolls who run around without even try to fight (it could be done with infantry too)
Can't be done with infantry too because infantry is to slow to kite for ever.

The Problems I see are as follows:
1. AI Cav is near useless.
2. Player Cav is overpowered (See all the threads on the forum here)
3. Cav can basically never be caught when the opponent doesn't have cav left.

The first two points lead to ramboing and should be adressed with AI fixes and general balancing.
The third point leads to delaying and can be adressed by accelerating morale loss at overwhelming odds.
 

Spottswoode

Veteran
Maybe it just my wrong assumption, but i think most of you who advocate for a cavalry that charge the enemy at the start to "break" enemy formation doesn't ever actually play cavalry in captain mode, and base his view on RTS game, where usually it is one of his role.
Next game try to take cavalry and do that, you will probably see that all your cav will be stopped by enemy units and killed without doing much damage, the match will be faster, but you were quite useless in it.
A full unit if cav charging to swing a fight or draw enemy units must be done at the right time. To early and yes your dead. At the right time and chaos is created while your formed up infantry units can fight more efficiently. Like any strategy it works when the unit takes the bait. This is mostly used by us when your infantry numbers are heavily outnumbered by enemy infantry 4v6 inf for instance. It's always based on the current circumstance in the match. And yes with basic communication and people who want to play the game as a team this is done in random matches too
 

Brandis.

Subforum Moderator
Can't be done with infantry too because infantry is to slow to kite for ever.

The Problems I see are as follows:
1. AI Cav is near useless.
2. Player Cav is overpowered (See all the threads on the forum here)
3. Cav can basically never be caught when the opponent doesn't have cav left.

The first two points lead to ramboing and should be adressed with AI fixes and general balancing.
The third point leads to delaying and can be adressed by accelerating morale loss at overwhelming odds.
Well put.
 
To be honest its a lot of technical uncertainty that require multiple angles and development time, when 5 dead players can simply judge the best via a simple vote to concede. I also made a thread about this.
 

Zarthas

Knight at Arms
To be honest its a lot of technical uncertainty that require multiple angles and development time, when 5 dead players can simply judge the best via a simple vote to concede. I also made a thread about this.
Eh, I disagree a bit, this should be around a dozen lines of code in C#, and some GUI indicator. I'll write it if they want.

However, vote to concede is also fine as a solution, not against it. It'd probably be actually more technically complex than this one lol.

I would slightly prefer having the game do this automatically as opposed to players having to take some action, however. That way there can be no "culture" of allowing and encouraging delaying shenanigans, and the opposing team does not particularly want to watch this happen either.
 

vfkaseke

Veteran
WB
Even if cav teamplays, realistically the cavalry player is most likely gonna be the last one alive even if they pull their forces into the infantry fight. The main purpose of cavalry in an inf battle is distraction, and small burst charges to do the most damage possible. Because of this games still would end in maybe 4v20 situations, even when cav pulls into the infantry fight. Are you saying that the cavalry player at that point should just give up and quit?
 
Top Bottom