RAMBO TACTIC, DEAR CAPTAINS, CAST UR VOTE!

What parameter of the mode should be turned to combat this tactic ?

  • Buff spears and pikes

    Votes: 6 9.5%
  • Nerf cav

    Votes: 6 9.5%
  • Make it impossible to park any unit class

    Votes: 11 17.5%
  • Make it impossible to park cav only

    Votes: 6 9.5%
  • Fix archers

    Votes: 10 15.9%
  • Something else need's to be done

    Votes: 24 38.1%

  • Total voters
    63

Users who are viewing this thread

AxiosXiphos

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
You know what I find odd about the hatred towards captains mode? It's the assumption that people who play it avoid other modes and never play 'proper' M&B. Just to ring off some credentials;

  1. Played M&B since it was called Warrider.
  2. Own every title and off-brand version of M&B
  3. Been part of 4 separate clans/regiments.
  4. Participated in group fighting tournaments.
  5. Played literal thousands of hours of Multiplayer.
  6. Designed and created my own mods.
Yet - because I enjoy Captains mode - that makes me somehow bad at the game? Because I'm willing to prove the opposite...
 

Horatius

Sergeant at Arms
WBNWVC
Inappropriate language
The guys who are pouring **** on the captain mode here, what's your problem? Come on by. We are all members of this forum, captain mode is part of multiplayer, so telling someone to stop writing about their problem is rude. Also, I do not understand the reproach they say “captain mode is casual", even if we assume that this is so, what's wrong with that? And yes, it is quite possible to balance the captain mode if you do this, which has not happened for the last six months. This mode still has great potential.
Captain mode is for pro xbotters and single player gays. Imagine killing bots and call it MP, go home you are drunk.

@AxiosXiphos go beat your meat somewhere else, no one cares about your so called sh*tdentials.
 

Spottswoode

Veteran
Great; he's a homophobe as well now...

Leave and never come back.
The guys who struggle to deal with their true inner feelings end up blurting out hate like this as a self defence mechanism. We all know it comes from a confused place where they can't reconcile with their own sexuality. One day he will find a place to be free. Until then he will obsess with calling other people gay. This is his second or third go say it on the thread and feel very tough about himself.

Your doing great @Horatius, one day you will find the door to your cage and be able to be free to fly like the beautiful butterfly your are :wink:
 

Horatius

Sergeant at Arms
WBNWVC
Great; he's a homophobe as well now...

Leave and never come back.
Can't be a homophobe if you are one! How about you just stop crying and go back to singleplayer or couching mode called captain jeez. But then again you also suck at that as you suck at the game.

Leave and never come back!!!

@Spottswoode don't worry my dude, my butterfly is free and nestling in every hole it can find. It can be in yours too if that is your desire! It's a pretty penny but my reviews all say 5/5 for their stars!
 

Spottswoode

Veteran
Can't be a homophobe if you are one! How about you just stop crying and go back to singleplayer or couching mode called captain jeez. But then again you also suck at that as you suck at the game.

Leave and never come back!!!

@Spottswoode don't worry my dude, my butterfly is free and nestling in every hole it can find. It can be in yours too if that is your desire! It's a pretty penny but my reviews all say 5/5 for their stars!
Aah, so just a very angry little fellow you are for other reasons then? Well, good luck to you sorting your head out buddy. It seems like you have some anger stuff going on that stems from some other missing pieces in your life! Try to breathe slowly a little bit more and you might find you can talk yourself down from these spurts of madness. Putting others down for no reason on internet forums might make your feel good for a moment, but you still have to go back to being you afterwards on the inside and out sounds like that's what really hurts. The need to relentlessly big note yourself and your performance in such an aggro way that puts others down so often comes from a place of insecurity and reveals so much about your character. I hope you can learn to be a bit more chill mate, it will be good for you, best if luck!

Also, I was thinking, your angry, sexy "I'll ram this" and "I'll aka couch that" approach might land you some studs in your usual Bannerlord community, I don't think it's working out to well with captain players. A bit less pent up aggression over here matey
 
Last edited:

Erminas

Section Moderator
WBNW
Can we please stop with insulting each other and return to the topic and issue Captain players have with this particular problem, the ramboing meta.

Skirmish players (well I am one too:p), I am not really sure why you feel like you need to degrade Captain mode players. They like and prefer their mode, you prefer skirmish, so if your only goal is to come to CM thread and cause drama, please DON'T!
 

AxiosXiphos

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Can't be a homophobe if you are one!
Yes you can. And yes you are.
Can't be a homophobe if you are one! How about you just stop crying and go back to singleplayer or couching mode called captain jeez. But then again you also suck at that as you suck at the game.

Leave and never come back!!!
Take this opportunity to learn something about interacting with other humans.
 
If TW would make it impossible to park any classes in cap mode, to fight 1xmeta, I fear the consequences of that major nerf will ruin the mode as we know it.

1: The "follow me command" will become useless.
2: Captains don't need any skill in unit control anymore.
3: Making a trap or ambush will become more or less impossible.
4: The archer class cannot scout for the enemy without risking their entire squad.
5: You cannot make a "waypoint" for your troops to run to anymore.
7: Rambo players will find a "work around" and do Rambo anyway.
8: The inf rush meta will return.
9: The lack of balance will not be fixed by it.
10: Viable classes will get diminished.
11: Viable tactics will get diminished.
12: Taking the flag, while your troops are safe and not exposed will become impossible.
13: You will have to be in the formation with your troops all the time, and cannot protect them vs inc cav.

This gigantic super nerf is a major step in the wrong direction for the mode. It will be the same as burning down the forest to kill 1 type of plant. A minor part of the community obviously got a totally other idea of what Captain mode is all about. For me it's about leading your troops. It's about unit control. That's the core idea of this mode and what makes it fun. How can I control my units if they follow me around no matter what I do? I really hope TW will reconsider going in this direction. It will simply not be a good foundation to build on. It will not solve the issues that have created the rambo meta in the first place. And it will create a whole new set of exploits and after a while, players will ask to get rid of that nerf again. Back and forth, back and forth, Nerf and Buff, Nerf and Buff. Time wasted.
 
Last edited:
Another major nerf that have been suggested to TW, is implementing max 3 respawns to fight the rambo meta. The idea is to discourage and punish anyone from attacking 1 unit at a time. You die 3 times, and your bot's will auto charge or just be parked and passive, while the captain is reduced to a observer that have to watch his troops get exploited by the enemy, sounds like a lot of fun, right ? This "idea" will damage the gameplay 100x more than the rambo meta does for the mode now. It will transform the mode into something else. It's counterintuitive and also ridicules to use skirmish rules to fight a skirmish meta. And it will not address the core issues in the mode : AI mechanics, factions balance and viable units classes.
 
Last edited:
Can we please stop with insulting each other and return to the topic and issue Captain players have with this particular problem, the ramboing meta.

Skirmish players (well I am one too:p), I am not really sure why you feel like you need to degrade Captain mode players. They like and prefer their mode, you prefer skirmish, so if your only goal is to come to CM thread and cause drama, please DON'T!
+1
Thank you
 

Brandis.

Subforum Moderator
If TW would make it impossible to park any classes in cap mode, to fight 1xmeta, I fear the consequences of that major nerf will ruin the mode as we know it.

1: The "follow me command" will become useless.
2: Captains don't need any skill in unit control anymore.
3: Making a trap or ambush will become more or less impossible.
4: The archer class cannot scout for the enemy without risking their entire squad.
5: You cannot make a "waypoint" for your troops to run to anymore.
7: Rambo players will find a "work around" and do Rambo anyway.
8: The inf rush meta will return.
9: The lack of balance will not be fixed by it.
10: Viable classes will get diminished.
11: Viable tactics will get diminished.
12: Taking the flag, while your troops are safe and not exposed will become impossible.
13: You will have to be in the formation with your troops all the time, and cannot protect them vs inc cav.

This gigantic super nerf is a major step in the wrong direction for the mode. It will be the same as burning down the forest to kill 1 type of plant. A minor part of the community obviously got a totally other idea of what Captain mode is all about. For me it's about leading your troops. It's about unit control. That's the core idea of this mode and what makes it fun. How can I control my units if they follow me around no matter what I do? I really hope TW will reconsider going in this direction. It will simply not be a good foundation to build on. It will not solve the issues that have created the rambo meta in the first place. And it will create a whole new set of exploits and after a while, players will ask to get rid of that nerf again. Back and forth, back and forth, Nerf and Buff, Nerf and Buff. Time wasted.
I'm not sure what the purpose of this was. You badly phrased a poll question, taking the common suggestion to add a limit or "leash" so that people couldn't park cav on the opposite side of the map then rambo, and twisted the meaning into something much more constrictive, then created a list of arguments against that.

I found this other lapse of logic to be similarly annoying. You argued that because a step in the right direction didn't accomplish the goal, we shouldn't take the step:

7: The goal is to make it riskier to rambo to compensate for how stupid AI is, it doesn't need to be removed entirely, and this can be tweaked.
8: Again, proper balancing and tweaking would prevent inf rush from being the only viable meta strategy.
9: This is the same as 8.
10: The game mode currently has something around 20% of classes as viable. It's hard to imagine a worse state. But again, this can be fixed.
11: Same as 10.
 

Aliaksandr

Veteran
Dear @Olaf The Cruel I absolutely agree with your arguments against any unrealistic and arcade restrictions on tactical freedom and realism in M&B. After all, these are the main components of this wonderful game that allowed its developers to achieve success. And I am sure that they understand this very well, and therefore they will not "flush down the toilet" the result of their many years of work as some unsuccessful sketch.
I perfectly understand that you (as well as me) were alarmed by this controversial post by @Callum (there may have been others):
The problem with that approach is that a human is always going to figure out a way to trick the AI (well, until all games have some type of AlphaStar AI opponents or something :razz:). The solution to Rambo-ing needs to be something that players count get around or exploit.
In it one could see (in the context of the discussion) a hint of his approval of the proposal of some short-sighted members of the community (and "arcade fans":wink:) about "leash" the captain to his squad or about limiting the number of his respawns. But given the above, I am sure that wisdom cannot leave the developers of such amazing game. And accordingly I am sure that post by @Callum did not reflect the way he chose to nerf Rambing's tactics. He's a smart guy - he won't make a move that leads to a forced checkmate!!!
 
I'm not sure what the purpose of this was. You badly phrased a poll question, taking the common suggestion to add a limit or "leash" so that people couldn't park cav on the opposite side of the map then rambo, and twisted the meaning into something much more constrictive, then created a list of arguments against that.

I found this other lapse of logic to be similarly annoying. You argued that because a step in the right direction didn't accomplish the goal, we shouldn't take the step:

7: The goal is to make it riskier to rambo to compensate for how stupid AI is, it doesn't need to be removed entirely, and this can be tweaked.
8: Again, proper balancing and tweaking would prevent inf rush from being the only viable meta strategy.
9: This is the same as 8.
10: The game mode currently has something around 20% of classes as viable. It's hard to imagine a worse state. But again, this can be fixed.
11: Same as 10.
It's cute that you get annoyed, but what do you expect me to do about it? That list is a summary of some of the points made in this thread. Maybe if you have actually read those posts you would be able to understand it better. The game breaking "leash" nerf shifts in distance from 1cm to 100 meters, it's all over the place. It depends on the counter arguments on how long players think the distance should be. And Ling even suggested punishing all unit classes with this nerf.

My poll argument cannot be misunderstood, and the poll questions are really really simple. And it does not surprise me that you are against any of my suggestions, since you are the one that have come up with this restriction in the first place. And I can see you resort to a personal attack on the CL discord. "Bad wording". Personal attacks is what people do if they run out of any real arguments. What's next, you going to make a list of all my spelling errors? Do me a favor, stay on topic.
 
Last edited:

AxiosXiphos

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
I don't understand this hatred towards a leash feature - a feature that would be presumably customisable in custom servers (when we finally get them).

It doesn't need to be a hard lock, or a short distance. Normal gameplay should not be effected in anyway - only parking units half a map away.

Ideally most players would never even know it exists.
 
Dear @Olaf The Cruel I absolutely agree with your arguments against any unrealistic and arcade restrictions on tactical freedom and realism in M&B. After all, these are the main components of this wonderful game that allowed its developers to achieve success. And I am sure that they understand this very well, and therefore they will not "flush down the toilet" the result of their many years of work as some unsuccessful sketch.
I perfectly understand that you (as well as me) were alarmed by this controversial post by @Callum (there may have been others):

In it one could see (in the context of the discussion) a hint of his approval of the proposal of some short-sighted members of the community (and "arcade fans":wink:) about "leash" the captain to his squad or about limiting the number of his respawns. But given the above, I am sure that wisdom cannot leave the developers of such amazing game. And accordingly I am sure that post by @Callum did not reflect the way he chose to nerf Rambing's tactics. He's a smart guy - he won't make a move that leads to a forced checkmate!!!
It's not that I don't understand the idea of nerfing some aspects of this mode to accomplice a "fun" gameplay. But the nerfing culture in BL is what have created this situation we are in today. I think many players that resort to wanting aspects of the game to be nerfed to hell, have a lazy playstyle, and expects the Dev's to fix the problem, instead of acting and adapting on it in game. Inf players want archers to be nerfed, archers want cav to be nerfed and so on. They are not being faithful to the overall balance of the game. But, I think there is a distinction between an exploit, that cannot be countered, and a tactic that makes you lose, that can be countered.

For instance, Ling's example of how 1 inf can sneak up to his archers and do a lot of damage. I've been in that situation, and it prompts me to be super aware of enemy inf movement. And even if this 1 single inf manages to go under my radar, I still have some options I could use to minimize losses. I adapt my playstyle, I am being progressive. What I don't do is to "give up" and want the dev's to ruin the balance to fix something that is part of the game. But Ling want this inf player never to be able to do it in the first place, with a "leash" of some distance. With that implemented, that single unit will sneak up on your archers with his entire squad instead. It simply will not fix anything. My suggestion is not a game breaking nerf, but a buff to the archers AI instead. But I still need to be super aware on enemy inf movement though. Being archers in the game you will have to spot and kill inf before they reach you, and being inf in the game you will have to "catch" them, both things need to be a possible, or you simply remove the tactical element in the game, and also the captains skill level in unit control doesn't matter anymore.

I don't understand this hatred towards a leash feature - a feature that would be presumably customisable in custom servers (when we finally get them).

It doesn't need to be a hard lock, or a short distance. Normal gameplay should not be effected in anyway - only parking units half a map away.

Ideally most players would never even know it exists.
The "leash" idea was suggested to fight the rambo meta. But the effort for the dev's to implement this "feature" would be a waste of time. Time they rather should use on the core problems of the mode. AI mechanics, Faction balance and Viable unit classes. Those fixes will make the rambo meta obsolete. Since all classes will be able to repel or even kill 1 single cav that is attacking your troops.

Can't wait to try the custom servers though.
 

Brandis.

Subforum Moderator
I don't usually break up posts this much but seems everything you said was in bad faith:

The game breaking "leash" nerf shifts in distance from 1cm to 100 meters, it's all over the place.

Any suggestion falls apart if you only consider the extremes. 1cm would be terrible. 100m would do nothing. But you can't use the extremes to discredit a balanced approach. That's reduction to absurdity.

My poll argument cannot be misunderstood, and the poll questions are really really simple.

"Make it impossible to park any class." Taken literally, this implies that F1F1 is removed from the game, along with the majority of commands as they rely on parking your troops temporarily. You specifically used "impossible" which means that temporary parks are impossible, so you couldn't temporarily park troops to rearrange them or hold a different angle, or basically anything.

Axios, who voted for this, clearly thought this meant a leash feature of an average distance to kill rambo. That's what I thought as well, the first time I saw it. It's not simple. It's unclear and confusing.

If you take a list of common proposals, then replace one of the proposals with something that sounds similar but is worded in a way that means something different, of course people are going to be confused.

At this point this feels like a deliberate attempt to discredit something that you personally feel would be bad for the game, by reaching for extremes and redefining the suggestion to be as easy as possible to refute.

And it does not surprise me that you are against any of my suggestions, since you are the one that have come up with this restriction in the first place.

The "leash" predates Bannerlord by half a decade as it was used in all major NW commander battle servers. Furthermore, I wasn't the first to propose this on the forums, that was a former NW player I'm pretty sure.

And I can see you resort to a personal attack on the CL discord. "Bad wording". Personal attacks is what people do if they run out of any real arguments. What's next, you going to make a list of all my spelling errors? Do me a favor, stay on topic.

Saying that poor wording confused people isn't a personal attack.

The "leash" idea was suggested to fight the rambo meta. But the effort for the dev's to implement this "feature" would be a waste of time. Time they rather should use on the core problems of the mode. AI mechanics, Faction balance and Viable unit classes. Those fixes will make the rambo meta obsolete. Since all classes will be able to repel or even kill 1 single cav that is attacking your troops.

If you buff anti-cav AI for ground troops, then rambo will be even more necessary because your entire squad of cav will be wiped when you charge in, compared to rambo, where you can get much higher value out of each individual unit rather than throw them away for low to no value.

There's not a single person that thinks faction balance and viable troops classes shouldn't be a priority.
 
I don't usually break up posts this much but seems everything you said was in bad faith:



Any suggestion falls apart if you only consider the extremes. 1cm would be terrible. 100m would do nothing. But you can't use the extremes to discredit a balanced approach. That's reduction to absurdity.



"Make it impossible to park any class." Taken literally, this implies that F1F1 is removed from the game, along with the majority of commands as they rely on parking your troops temporarily. You specifically used "impossible" which means that temporary parks are impossible, so you couldn't temporarily park troops to rearrange them or hold a different angle, or basically anything.

Axios, who voted for this, clearly thought this meant a leash feature of an average distance to kill rambo. That's what I thought as well, the first time I saw it. It's not simple. It's unclear and confusing.

If you take a list of common proposals, then replace one of the proposals with something that sounds similar but is worded in a way that means something different, of course people are going to be confused.

At this point this feels like a deliberate attempt to discredit something that you personally feel would be bad for the game, by reaching for extremes and redefining the suggestion to be as easy as possible to refute.



The "leash" predates Bannerlord by half a decade as it was used in all major NW commander battle servers. Furthermore, I wasn't the first to propose this on the forums, that was a former NW player I'm pretty sure.



Saying that poor wording confused people isn't a personal attack.



If you buff anti-cav AI for ground troops, then rambo will be even more necessary because your entire squad of cav will be wiped when you charge in, compared to rambo, where you can get much higher value out of each individual unit rather than throw them away for low to no value.

There's not a single person that thinks faction balance and viable troops classes shouldn't be a priority.
Again, u need to scroll back and view the older posts in this thread. Then you will be up to date on the parameters I have suggested and it's pro and con's.

The poll questions is not any specific and final solution to the rambo meta. It's very general, and I have used the most common different suggestions I have seen from the community. I wanted to see what single change to the mode players would think is the most important. And the poll questions does not represent what I believe should be done even.

With the suggestions I have made, which you can read about in the older posts, a full charge with cav will not get wiped out vs upgraded inf or range units. Because of the reason you have pointed out, that the cav player have to be encouraged and also be a viable and balanced unit class still. In fact, they actually need to do full cav attacks, to spread out the damage taken on more units. While a single cav, a single target, will receive the full attention of those units and be repelled or die if they come alone for you. This will force cav into a support role where they need to time their attacks. And also remove cav as the primary damage dealer. I have suggested a buff to the cav AI also, to further encourage full stack attacks.

https://forums.taleworlds.com/index...ear-captains-cast-ur-vote.445351/post-9731761

This is the game I want to play
 
Last edited:

Spottswoode

Veteran
Ideally most players would never even know it exists.
This is how a fairly large distance leash would effect my gameplay, more or less unnoticeable, I always have my units with me anyways. I do tuck them behind objects when I'm scouting but never that far away. The maps are built in such a way where there is always cover of some description nearby, except for a few circumstances coming into the c flag in open fields on forest and jawali. However you can still approach those areas and scout the enemy position before revealing your units.

@Olaf The Cruel I do understand your point re solo approach to a unit of archers... But in my vision of it you can still solo approach a bunch of archers with a long leash, however in a completely open field your ai will most likely also be in range to be shot by those archers... But let's say those archers are positioned on the c flag at jawali you can still leave your units out of sight on the down side of the ramp while you rush them solo or come up from the rear on the left side and tuck them behind a building with a long leash in play. Depending on the length of the leash you may reach the their position before it takes up slack, however you have still effectively caused the enemy ai to do whatever your objective was (drop range for mele or fire into your shield or whatever) I'm not a huge fan of the solo unit soaking up all the archer arrows in his shield but it is what it is with current ai control and intelligence and at this point it's up to the archer unit to hold fire or change position/direction at this point to save ammo
 
Last edited:

Spottswoode

Veteran
Well written and sounds good tbh, I would absolutely agree that the game functioning as perfectly as that with the caveat of "really dangerous ai units from all classes" would be amazing and even better than leash... I did have faith once that was achievable and what TW wanted too... I'm well past that now.. I figure a singular change is more likely, but yeah for sure balancing everything perfectly and having ai highly optimized as you have described would be amazing. My optimism died a while ago and my PoV now stands at "if your not going to really do anything to captain mode, at least just stop the rambo so it can get back to some resemblance of what it was"
 
Top Bottom