Problems

[OurGloriousLeader]

Well heavy inf still gets picked because you are dead meat if you take lighter inf. Cav one shots you, archers too, and if you get to fight heavy inf one hit will get you so low that any arrow will finish you.

Heavy inf gets nerfed over and over. Since the first beast we have had class limits in order to not play CS GO with 3 cavs running around. But still the devs keep pushing down the inf nerfs down our throats.

Sure, I get that the heavy inf meta is driven to some degree by the class restrictions, but at the same time if it was so weak we would expect to see the class restrictions maxed out more often e.g 2-2-2. But from my understanding, even on the most open map like Trading Outpost, this isn't the case, usually matches seem to be 1-2 cav and 1 archer max.

I certainly don't think inf are overpowered, although I agree with the throwing removal, but they are clearly filling in a niche use, and doing it well.

 

[Dextrus]

Sure, I get that the heavy inf meta is driven to some degree by the class restrictions, but at the same time if it was so weak we would expect to see the class restrictions maxed out more often e.g 2-2-2. But from my understanding, even on the most open map like Trading Outpost, this isn't the case, usually matches seem to be 1-2 cav and 1 archer max.

I certainly don't think inf are overpowered, although I agree with the throwing removal, but they are clearly filling in a niche use, and doing it well.

It depends as far as I know. On open maps in Div A Teams would gladly play 2/2/2 but only with certain factions. I am mostly fine with the removal of throwing weapons but I think that sturgia might need it back because their archers are pretty weak.

 

[Tryerror]

Sure, I get that the heavy inf meta is driven to some degree by the class restrictions, but at the same time if it was so weak we would expect to see the class restrictions maxed out more often e.g 2-2-2. But from my understanding, even on the most open map like Trading Outpost, this isn't the case, usually matches seem to be 1-2 cav and 1 archer max.

I certainly don't think inf are overpowered, although I agree with the throwing removal, but they are clearly filling in a niche use, and doing it well.

That was because Heavy Inf had throwing weapons - now without them 2/2/2 is getting more meta everyday i believe to see in clangames

#inflivesmatter

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

That was because Heavy Inf had throwing weapons - now without them 2/2/2 is getting more meta everyday i believe to see in clangames

#inflivesmatter

I would be surprised if this is the case, probably it will lead to more options - but even if it is the case, if you were only taking a class because they had extremely effective ranged and heavy armour, functionally what is the difference between that and an archer anyway? Either way it would be clear the game isn't encouraging melee enough, which is why melee improvements must still be the focus. ?

 

[Aprikosenmann]

Archers do need more nerfs. The only class that can touch them is cav but only when that cav comes from behind unnoticed. A good archer dishes out dmg left and right and he cannot be beaten in a 1v1 if he knows how to block.

So you 2 People to kill the Archer in melee, but to get 2 people close to that one archer, you sacrifice your whole team and even then the archer can just run away.

So pls don’t say archers got nerfed because you need to wait half a second longer to have pin point accuracy.

I dont think that Archers need nerf. Archers are still weaker than Cav. Its just that INF needs to be stronger. For example strong throwables on heavy inf

 

[Pacemaker]

I would be surprised if this is the case, probably it will lead to more options - but even if it is the case, if you were only taking a class because they had extremely effective ranged and heavy armour, functionally what is the difference between that and an archer anyway? Either way it would be clear the game isn't encouraging melee enough, which is why melee improvements must still be the focus. ?

It's not so much that there is anything wrong with melee, it is the lack of versatility on infantry classes that makes them underwhelming. The spears feeling ineffective against cavarly and the brutal throwing weapon nerf reduced them to a vanguard keeping the archers from going into melee and allowing them to deal all the damage to the cavarly and enemy infantry. They are still the best class when it comes to actual survival.

 

[Steelo]

Archers do need more nerfs. The only class that can touch them is cav but only when that cav comes from behind unnoticed. A good archer dishes out dmg left and right and he cannot be beaten in a 1v1 if he knows how to block.

So you 2 People to kill the Archer in melee, but to get 2 people close to that one archer, you sacrifice your whole team and even then the archer can just run away.

So pls don’t say archers got nerfed because you need to wait half a second longer to have pin point accuracy.

But just because of this we have a class limit for them. Trust me if they nerf it again it doesnt worth to play anymore and clans mostly will go for 4 inf + 2 cav. Maybe Archer's movement speed can be reduced a little bit for infantries.

 

[AVRC]

As a developer you are telling me to just go play TDM and Siege because I don't want to play classes that are META at this moment. I am here on the forums because I want to share my feedback and you're telling me to play another gamemode.. Isn't the whole point of being on forums together that we improve the game so that most of us will get an enjoyable experience?

Also, like Aprikosenmann just said, Cavalry beats Infantry and Archers beat Infantry so according to your logic this means: don't take inf.

I am heavily disappointed in you AVRC and with this attitude I doubt this game will reach a desired state. That is, without the help of the modding community.

On top of that, by telling people to bug off to Siege or TDM because they don't find some aspects of Skirmish enjoyable, you might scare them off altogether.. This is already happening by the way.

You are telling me that you actively decide on not making the winning play on a Competitive Game and then you are complaining that you lose because of your bad decision even though you acknowledge that you are aware and capable of making the correct decision.

What I am trying to say is, if you want to play whatever class you want regardless of the game situation you should play a more casual game mode where it matters much less. However if you are making the bad play on purpose in a competitive mode and losing as a result, you have no right to complain especially when you acknowledge that there was a better play but you did not feel like doing it.

What you are providing specifically on this point is not feedback, its a request so that the game is changed to cater to your personal troop choices.

I will not take this discussion any further.

 

[Einarcf]

Haha lets say steppe bow and khan guards go 1 vs 1 ? in captain and in skrmish. What do you think who would win? Both players have the same amount of skill.

I guess arrow speed is not relevant in captain since bots can't dodge an incoming slow arrow. Players can and will. Besides, bringing 1 v1 into the conversation is not that interesting. I care about their role with 5 other players on my team. If I have aserai or khuzait with 330 gold (common gold value after 1st round with 1 heavy and 1 light archer, I am very tempted to go 110 x 3 than 160 x 2. Not only because of fast arrows. But also because of how often those factions will triple spawn inf with 130, 130, 90 (Khuzait) and 100, 100, 100 (Aserai). It is expected that their frontline dies often, and that means archer could die, being alone. If I went two heavy, I don't have enough for the final wave.

*Edit*
This is for skirmish.

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

It's not so much that there is anything wrong with melee, it is the lack of versatility on infantry classes that makes them underwhelming. The spears feeling ineffective against cavarly and the brutal throwing weapon nerf reduced them to a vanguard keeping the archers from going into melee and allowing them to deal all the damage to the cavarly and enemy infantry. They are still the best class when it comes to actual survival.

Their survival is what will keep them viable. I definitely agree there are other improvements though e.g. cav nerfs and maybe some further shield buffs to stop archers being so threatening, plus melee improvements to allow skilled inf to come out on top.

 

[Mabons]

I detect a lot of salt in this thread. Inf mains saying they are useless, archer mains say they are useless. Only guys who haven’t come to say they are useless is the cav mains, and that says a lot about the current patch.

 

[YourMum69]

You are telling me that you actively decide on not making the winning play on a Competitive Game and then you are complaining that you lose because of your bad decision even though you acknowledge that you are aware and capable of making the correct decision.

What I am trying to say is, if you want to play whatever class you want regardless of the game situation you should play a more casual game mode where it matters much less. However if you are making the bad play on purpose in a competitive mode and losing as a result, you have no right to complain especially when you acknowledge that there was a better play but you did not feel like doing it.

What you are providing specifically on this point is not feedback, its a request so that the game is changed to cater to your personal troop choices.

I will not take this discussion any further.

 

[Pacemaker]

Archers do need more nerfs. The only class that can touch them is cav but only when that cav comes from behind unnoticed. A good archer dishes out dmg left and right and he cannot be beaten in a 1v1 if he knows how to block.

So you 2 People to kill the Archer in melee, but to get 2 people close to that one archer, you sacrifice your whole team and even then the archer can just run away.

So pls don’t say archers got nerfed because you need to wait half a second longer to have pin point accuracy.

Archers don't need more nerfs. At this point, you would be turning them into cripples that even their mains wouldn't want to play anymore. Their ranged capabilities make them important for skirmish, that's undeniable. But if you're still asking for nerfs, maybe you just want a gamemode without projectiles? Not a bad idea, but I wouldn't want to see skirmish gutted like that.

 

[Firunien]

I detect a lot of salt in this thread. Inf mains saying they are useless, archer mains say they are useless. Only guys who haven’t come to say they are useless is the cav mains, and that says a lot about the current patch.

Of course cavs are happy about the change, in my last official match i got oneshotted 3 times by a franceska to the knee..
I just think the nerf was too hard, especially on damage of throwingaxes and smaller javelins.

Also Cavalry will always be strong in this gamemode, because of the respawns, you can kill spawned troops while also beeing able to spawn and get to the fight quickly, class restrictions on cav are needed for skirmish.

@Pacemaker
Archer should just be a bit slower(movementspeed), or inf faster, otherwise they are in a good spot now, except crossbows x)

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

or a one life mode

 

[Namakan]

or a one life mode

oh shush, it will be ready soonTM

just like the replay system they showed off working in 2015....

 

[KSHMR]

You are telling me that you actively decide on not making the winning play on a Competitive Game and then you are complaining that you lose because of your bad decision even though you acknowledge that you are aware and capable of making the correct decision.

What I am trying to say is, if you want to play whatever class you want regardless of the game situation you should play a more casual game mode where it matters much less. However if you are making the bad play on purpose in a competitive mode and losing as a result, you have no right to complain especially when you acknowledge that there was a better play but you did not feel like doing it.

What you are providing specifically on this point is not feedback, its a request so that the game is changed to cater to your personal troop choices.

I will not take this discussion any further.

Yet again, you have failed to grasp the point that I am trying to make. It seems you are very keen on judging my personal preferences with regard to playing Infantry. Firstly, I am sure that this is not just my personal opinion as others openly express similar thoughts and opinions. Secondly, I think we all have a right to complain since everyone knows this game is far from finished. Telling people they have no right to complain is not going to be very beneficial for the development of this game, trust me. Unless you want everyone to shut up and keep quiet even though they dislike the game. The weaker parts of Infantry need to be considered and it is not as simple as just not choosing Inf.

Walking away from this discussion like this is very unprofessional and you know it. This forum was made for a reason and writing topics off as easy as this is simply outrageous.

 

[Firunien]

@AVRC will we see a price increase for light inf or price decrease for heavy inf? It seems you want to equalize their value so the same should be done to pricing.

 

[Younes]

Isn't the whole point of being on forums together that we improve the game so that most of us will get an enjoyable experience?

As if that is really what these forums are for.

 

[AVRC]

@AVRC will we see a price increase for light inf or price decrease for heavy inf? It seems you want to equalize their value so the same should be done to pricing.

We are testing some interesting changes related to overall economy but nothing is decided yet.

We don't want to equalize their value, they should reflect their gold costs in capability.
We are planning some more adjustments to make Infantry more effective against Cav in the correct situations.