Problems

Currently viewing this thread:

tom54p

Knight
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.
The thing is most of the times i still can't catch archers as an infantry, they run away quicker so you either commit to prolonged jogging or leave them be.
 

arockstar2

Recruit
Wow, this thread really blew up overnight. I’m seeing some calls for archers to be nerfed, PLEASE NO. Archers are in a really good place right now (after having been pretty useless for months).
Heavy Infantry is expected to lose to 2Handers, however, they shouldn't be getting killed by archers in most cases, we will make adjustments if required. We are looking into the walking speeds for formations.
I get that heavy infantry is supposed to lose to 2 handers; this has always been the case and I’m not advocating against that. When they had throwables, heavy infantry at least had a fighting chance to soften up 2 handers.

I’m glad walking speeds for formations are being looked into!

Also don’t get me wrong, I’ve been really enjoying this patch. It’s refreshing to have cavalry and especially archers viable again. The months long reign of infantry spam meta is finally over! It’s just apparent that heavy shields got hit the worst with the last patch. I typically play whatever is best for the team, but I can’t stomach playing heavy shields right now. While playing as an archer, even I feel bad destroying shield units. I think adjusting formation speeds will return a nice balance.
 

WMorton

Veteran
  1. You are literally saying you acknowledge that there is another class which increases your chance of winning an engagement in a competitive game but you actively refuse to pick it and then complain that you are losing the engagement. If you don't like switching your class depending on the in game situation maybe you should stick with Siege or TDM. You are also validating the fact that different classes have weaknesses and strengths depending on the situation so it seems to me that everything is working as it should.
  2. .
  3. Yes, the more people in a stack the higher the calculated group MMR used for matching. We are adjusting the game and adding new MP features to increase the player base.
  4. Not yet.
For #3 when could we expect to see this feature intended to increase the playerbase? I know you are super cool kid secretive about the particular details of things so just a range of time for when we learn anything new. Also, if this feature isn't its own gamemode and just an addon to Captain or Skirmish, then I don't see how these will not only increase the playerbase but also keep it around, so how do you intend to keep the casuals interested? Skirmish and Captain on their own are playerbase limiters because of their limited capacity and limited interest among the community and I believe that whenever you pump out the duel gamemode you teased a couple months ago will be attractive to an even smaller audience, so please don't let that be the super cool kid secretive surprise that's supposed to increase the playerbase cause it won't.
 

TheBard

Salt Knight
Sergeant Knight at Arms
They haven't been useless. They have never been useless. The restriction in competitive play has been imposed for a reason and that was backed by a lot of teams, when we had the second vote the majority for these restrictions in BEAST#2 it was even more overwhelming. Archers are the highest damage dealer next to cav in Skirmish because they can one to twoshot everything at range. Ever tried that with infantry now? Hm?

The thing is most of the times i still can't catch archers as an infantry, they run away quicker so you either commit to prolonged jogging or leave them be.
And this right here is the problem, it doesn't matter if you're light inf or heavy inf, you just won't catch up, even light infantry will be jogging for prolonged amount of time to close in on archer. I'm not even talking about the dangers of doing that because the bulk/majority of light infantry which is supposed to catch/kill archers has abysmal shielding, so if you close in you get usually half your HP taken away before the archer needs to run. If this shall be the meta, infantry doing the dying while archer and cavalry clean up the battlefield, okay. It's your choice as developer.
 
Last edited:

arockstar2

Recruit
They haven't been useless. They have never been useless. The restriction in competitive play has been imposed for a reason and that was backed by a lot of teams, when we had the second vote the majority for these restrictions in BEAST#2 it was even more overwhelming. Archers are the highest damage dealer next to cav in Skirmish because they can one to twoshot everything at range. Ever tried that with infantry now? Hm?
Bud, I’m talking about Captain’s mode, where infantry spam was the meta for MONTHS because archers were heavy nerfed to cater to skirmish players.
 

Forsee

Veteran
Reduce archs ms by half but buff the shooting. Archers wouldn't be able to kite inf, if inf wants to kill an archer staying alone he will be easily able to, but if infantry is not aware of that archer he will totally rekt them (as it was before), and also archers would be a good counter to currently op cav. Games will become way more strategical, cav problem would be solved.
 

Firunien

Grandmaster Knight
Bud, I’m talking about Captain’s mode, where infantry spam was the meta for MONTHS because archers were heavy nerfed to cater to skirmish players.
For the love of god, archernerf was never the problem, please go tell this to your other captain players as well. Shooting mechanic as a whole was overhauled without adjusting bots to it. Now they removed crushthrough ONLY because of catering to captain players, see what i did there.. spewing nonsense like you.
 

WakaWaka

Sergeant
haha light cav in a good place? light cav is probably the most useless unit in this game. Low armor for rider and low armor for horse. Most dont have shields. There is literally no reason to take beduins when you can take mamluke. In captain there is no cost, only bigger numbers.

Maybe in skmirsh the lack of armor you can replace with skill but in captain where you are only 1 out of 10 in your group, no. AI is AI, and it will get killed easily with less armor.

Light troops need more speed or dmg to make the viable. You cant add them numbers because that will maybe balance out captain but not skrmish.
lmao light cav useless when actualy most of the cav-player prioritise playing 2 time light than heavy
 

Rangah

Sergeant Knight at Arms
WBWF&SNWVC
seeing as this has turned into a general rant thread - I absolutely despise couches being oneshots again, pressing x for an unblockable oneshot attack is a cheap way to get kills and rewards no skill, it boosts so many average cav players K/Ds and ruins games, come at me couchbots
9294_Pepepunch.png
 

arockstar2

Recruit
For the love of god, archernerf was never the problem, please go tell this to your other captain players as well. Shooting mechanic as a whole was overhauled without adjusting bots to it. Now they removed crushthrough ONLY because of catering to captain players, see what i did there.. spewing nonsense like you.
Look, I don’t know why you’re so peeved. Cavalry was nerfed and archers nerfed even harder due to skirmish players demands, which destroyed the balance of captains for like 4 freaking months. It devolved into full infantry spam. I think I have a right to be upset over that.

It seems the problem really comes down to a need for balance separations between the modes. However TW has shown no desire to do that, leaving us warring in the forums to make our voices heard.
 

WakaWaka

Sergeant
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)
lisen this man
 

IceNoVa

The Kaiser
Global Moderator
WBM&BVCNWWF&S
Bud, I’m talking about Captain’s mode, where infantry spam was the meta for MONTHS because archers were heavy nerfed to cater to skirmish players.
Which is literally why the Skirmish base, and some captain players that I know, advocate for them to be balanced separately.
From a Skirmish pov:

Most classes have some sort of utility (countering another class, high damage, multi spawn, throwables etc)
Which is all very good in theory, if you completely ignore practices like kiting etc.
As of now, ranged units are okay, but crossbows are way too accurate and you can turn and shoot without much delay very precisely. You can also achieve a fairly solid rate of fire with a weapon that will 1shot most enemies.
Archers are fairly okay where they are at atm, since the crosshair makes timing fairly predictable and you can't flick shot (reliably) with a 360. You'll get the most bang for your denar when you stay a little outside of combat (or further) and can do your task reliably.
I'd argue for their ranged damage potential and melee deficits compared infantry that trade-off is acceptable from either side.

But while you may be able to fend off attacking cavalry by rearing their horse, you cannot fight ranged opponents effectively. Since the removal of thrown weapons for heavy inf at all. Because the only viable option would be to actively engage them and chase them down and expose yourself, which does not work properly since you need ages to chase down an archer. Movement speed is a corner stone of the PvP combat and as the numbers you see in the armory don't really mean all that much. Some people might suggest that you can get your shield on your back to pursue the ranger and close the distance faster, but I assume most people would see the issue with approaching a ranged opponent without protection of ranged weaponry.
It's the same with shock infantry pulling out long 2h weapons that can outmaneuver e.g. archers in close combat with their high movement speed and low weighted gear. I'd suggest fine-tuning that aspect to make melee more satisfactory. M&Bs core feature should be the intense, skill-based melee combat and the suggestion to just pick a class to avoid that is just weapons-grade short-sightedness.

Cav btw is fine in my book, you can pick either to get two spawns and the heavy cav will be the better option out of the two. Working as intended, I assume.

Does any of this transfer well into Captain? No, because you cram x bots into a formation and fight in a wastly different way than compared to Skirmish. AI Archers and cav will not have a comparable impact compared to Skirmish PvP players, because the AI will miss opportunities which a good player won't. The alternative of a perfectly capable AI troop would stomp players, hence that's not an option for even the most naive half-wit.

Look, I don’t know why you’re so peeved. Cavalry was nerfed and archers nerfed even harder due to skirmish players demands, which destroyed the balance of captains for like 4 freaking months. It devolved into full infantry spam. I think I have a right to be upset over that.

It seems the problem really comes down to a need for balance separations between the modes. However TW has shown no desire to do that, leaving us warring in the forums to make our voices heard.
I assume you specifically mean shock infantry spam, since 2h and the crushthrough mechanic were not working as intended? That was not exactly a suggestion on the Skirmish side of the community, but rather a development stage that needed fixing.
Captain probably just needs to find the balance in aim-bot settings for archers to hit something reliably without being overpowered whereas cavalry needs to move meaningfully and cleverly to not just get stuck/reared and be finished off.

The need to balance these modes separately is evident and has been voiced many times, we'll just keep politely doing that until it happens or there is a miracle solution to everyone's satisfaction.

The reasoning behind it is clear to me: Captain, opposed to Skirmish, TDM and siege, relies on bots and is thus not pure PvP, which requires a separate balance. Which is probably why the developers chose to to do that by giving some units more spawns, but that does not adress issues in game mechanics/ equipment balance, which is why there will not be an equilibrium for Captain/Skirmish balance.
 

Namakan

Grandmaster Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
seeing as this has turned into a general rant thread - I absolutely despise couches being oneshots again, pressing x for an unblockable oneshot attack is a cheap way to get kills and rewards no skill, it boosts so many average cav players K/Ds and ruins games, come at me couchbots
think we talked about this already, but I do think couched lances should be oneshots.
That said I do NOT understand why they have no cooldowns and no maximum durations. Would you be fine with oneshots so long as couched lances had those two things?
 

Loyal2Odin

Sergeant
I have some questions for the developers:

1- Are you going to add throwables to heavy infantry classes again?
2- Are you going to make all maces have more or less the same speed?
3- Are you going to make matchmaking solo/duo queue and full team queue for competitive?
4- Are you going to allow us to see the scoreboard after the match is finished, instead instantly scrolling up and kicking us?

Seeing as this thread has apparently exploded overnight, let's remind everyone to stick to the initial subject.

I really wonder how TW plans to implement the MMR system that AVRC mentioned because that system really only works with a larger playerbase.

Also, I think Bard mentioned this; for example Sturgia heavy Infs really need those throwing weapons because their archers are really bad. How else are they going to close gaps to enemy archers? There is literally no point in chasing an archer across the entire map and turning this into Mount and Running Simulator.
 

IceNoVa

The Kaiser
Global Moderator
WBM&BVCNWWF&S
Also, I think Bard mentioned this; for example Sturgia heavy Infs really need those throwing weapons because their archers are really bad. How else are they going to close gaps to enemy archers? There is literally no point in chasing an archer across the entire map and turning this into Mount and Running Simulator.
The hunter has gotten a little better, they're basically a Batannia ranger with a shield and a little less potent longbow. Their melee weapons could use a little more speed though, they feel a little sluggish compared to Legionaires or Sergeants.
It's Sturgia Achilles heel not to have a heavy archer, a viable option in compliance with the precepts TW is going for (each faction not having one type of troop) would be a little buff for the Brigand. Get them comparable to a Wildling and (as of now maybe just better shielding options and a decent sidearm) and they're good to go.

MMR might be just another tricky bit for the small MP team, but I reckon it'll account for player unique MMR, amount of players in the stack and an average MMR and try to match accordingly?
 

Rangah

Sergeant Knight at Arms
WBWF&SNWVC
think we talked about this already, but I do think couched lances should be oneshots.
That said I do NOT understand why they have no cooldowns and no maximum durations. Would you be fine with oneshots so long as couched lances had those two things?
A cooldown and a maximum duration of 3-4 seconds is necessary and would most likely change my view on couches, couchlord
 

Mabons

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Inf hold points

Inf die so the cav and archers can carry, I've said it before you have to be a masochist and kind of sick in the head to want to play infantry all the time never mind competitively. Good thing I am both of those.
 

MP_Erik

Sergeant
M&BWBWF&SNW
Bud, I’m talking about Captain’s mode, where infantry spam was the meta for MONTHS because archers were heavy nerfed to cater to skirmish players.
How about each of us starts saying what gamemode they mean when talking about troop balance? These regular misunderstandings are becoming annoying.

Heavy infantry is expected to have a significant disadvantage vs Shock Troops, this is also a fact for Captain's Mode. Shock Troops are the natural counter to Heavy Infantry so Heavy Infantry should not have the weapons countering their counter. This has nothing to do with mode differences.

edit: To add to this point. Heavy Inf should be at a stalemate vs archers and archers should be destroying the Shock Troops. If any part of this is not the case we will make adjustments to make so.
I think someone should draw out the natural circle of what beats what. Because i feel like people have different idea's on what beats what.
Talking about captain balance:
We have skirmishers, shock troops, shields, archers and cav each in al light and heavy variant.

The balance I would wish to see is about as follows (with a few insecurities):
-Skirmishers beat shock and archers
-Shock beats shield and cav
-Shields beat cav
-Archers beat shock
-Cav beats archers and skirmish
The light variants would perform better in melee in the open when they can bring their numbers to bear but be more vulnerable to ranged attacks and underperform at bottlenecks where they cant put their numbers to use all at once.
There's obviously a lot of other factors at play where the balance of what beats what is situational.

What is think to observe in practice is this:
-Cav doesn't beat anything, they AI just gets stuck in the inf and dies.
-Archers don't beat anything, even shock troops can usually close up and initialize a melee before significant damage is done. (It's a bit more complicated and I have seen archers work but it requires good coordination with your team and bad coordination among the opponents).
-Shield beats archers and cav.
-Shock beats everything.
-Skirmishers are just a worse version of shields because of the limited effective range and the difficulty to time the AI shots.
-Light troops usually overwhelm the less numerous heavy troops

I think a lot of the problems come down to the AI being unable to use ranged weapons and mobility effectively so that the combat is often comes to the melee before an advantage is gained. (AI is also not super at melee but that is symmetrical and effects both sides equally).
 
Top Bottom