Skirmish Problems

[OurGloriousLeader]

Wanted to give some feedback on Skirmish as a game mode now that I've had a good few months to play it and also see how it is on wider release. I don't think it's beyond redemption and have had some fun with it, but there are quite a few flaws. I've put them into 3 main categories.

Respawns

-Respawns create a lack of intensity often, instead after the first few kills it ends up with people just trickling one by one. They could wait sure, but why wait when you have outnumbered team mates still fighting or are losing flags? The purpose of respawns was to keep people playing, so seems inevitable that they will just hold W and run to the fight.
-The above ends up punishing pushes and strategies as well - very often I've pushed with the team to take a flag and killed half the enemy team then set about fighting the rest, but during this enemies start respawning as archers in positions with perfect vision of where we're fighting. This is particularly bad on the forest map where they literally cannot be pushed in some spawns that nevertheless have good positions for helping on certain flags.
-Snowballing. Instead of gaining moderate equipment upgrades as a "snowball" in Warband, now teams gain lives as well as better equipment over their opponents. I feel for any new player that manages to make the shot of their life and kill the best player on the opposing team only for them to return as another mega unit. Any skill difference is now magnified by the extra lives a winning team gains.
-Personal preference, but a general lack of tension and reward from the existence of multiple lives. Feels like plays matter less, and attrition matters more (which is its own strategy, but less viscerally exciting for me)

Possible solutions: single life mode, longer respawn time, no heavy classes being able to spawn twice, spawn in waves or only when objective captured. No protected spawns!!!

Classes

-Armour and Heavy Cav is unarguably superior in every respect, and available on round 1, and you can get 2 lives sometimes from round 1 or at least by round 2. This has created a meta where people are extremely tanky. It's just not fun. By having the goal of making knights etc playable for all, this has had a negative effect on all play.
-Conversely, due to this certain classes are just useless, beyond as a hail mary 4th life. Fine for trolling I guess, but even that aspect is not as enjoyable as custom equipment.

Possible solutions: massively increase the cost of armoured classes, preferably not available on round 1. Alternatively, nerf armour.

Flags

-The 3 flags being there from the start encourages scattered play, in a game where numbers matter greatly every new player is given a bunch of things to head for a so split off to be mown down by cav or a deathball of armoured inf.
-Cavalry capping while being on their horse is a huge buff for them and further creates the scattered feeling of needing to spread out to multiple flags. 1 cav caps a flag miles away, 2-3 public players will often look at that and see "FLAG! Must cap..." Also makes cav essential.
-Frequently fights will end mid fight due to morale dropping, you can argue the losing team should have paid attention, but it is still anticlimactic.
-How the final flag spawns is absolutely not clear. It seems to follow the following spawn as final flag:

- If no flags captured, random
- If 2 flags captured by one side, randomly one of these
- If 1 flag each, the neutral flag
- If 2 flags captured by one side but one is contested, this one
- If 2 flags captured by one side, but one is contested, then another one, while the other team flag is being captured, the first contested one is the final flag

Hopefully you can see how this is confusing and can often be decided by things like a guy just randomly running in as a 2nd spawn on cav. Not good, should be clearer.

Possible solutions: Obvious how the last flag spawns (first flag captured, or cannot be the final flag from previous round, anything clear), Cav must dismount to cap flags, points awarded for capping flags but more if you're near team.

That's all for now...

 

[Mabons]

The most infuriating thing is the lack of spawn points for teams so they end up spawning on top of you while you're fighting some guy completely by accident just happens to be their spawn point. This also has a flip side where I've seen us dominate a team that hard they are spawning into us waiting for them.

 

[EbdanianAdmiral]

The flags would benefit extremely from being linear instead of horizontal to spawns. TF2 Has a gamemode exactly like skirmish called "control points" which is BRILLIANT. It works in TF2 because it is a tug of war between the spawns rather than scattered horizontally.

TF2: Spawn1 >>>>>>Flag>>>>>>Flag<<<<<Flag<<<<<<Spawn2


...........................................Flag................................
Bannerlord: Spawn>>>>>>> Flag<<<<<<<<<<Spawn
..........................................Flag..............................


Also I will never shut up about Heavy Cav costing 200g until Heavy Cav costs 200g.

 

[Caps]

The flags would benefit extremely from being linear instead of horizontal to spawns. TF2 Has a gamemode exactly like skirmish called "control points" which is BRILLIANT. It works in TF2 because it is a tug of war between the spawns rather than scattered horizontally.

TF2: Spawn1 >>>>>>Flag>>>>>>Flag<<<<<Flag<<<<<<Spawn2


...........................................Flag................................
Bannerlord: Spawn>>>>>>> Flag<<<<<<<<<<Spawn
..........................................Flag..............................


Also I will never shut up about Heavy Cav costing 200g until Heavy Cav costs 200g.

imo there should be all kinds of flag layouts: triangular, vertical, horizontal, diagonal
might even consider taking 2 or 4 flags for some maps

 

[EbdanianAdmiral]

imo there should be all kinds of flag layouts: triangular, vertical, horizontal, diagonal
might even consider taking 2 or 4 flags for some maps

The flags can be configured however you want, but as long as there is no logical path to follow fights will continue to be scattered messes with no flow. The linear flags dont actually have to be in a straight line, you just cant have 3 flags all exactly the same distance from spawn. Again, look at TF2 control point maps. They are beautify designed and balanced for a class based, multiple lives game mode.

And before anyone says "Well Warband maps weren't linear!" That has nothing to do with a multible lives gamemode. In warband fights were very focused because everyone only had one life per round.

 

[Fietta]

In regards to your respawn feedback and more specifically your 'single life' solution, there's currently a single life gamemode in the works. Single life just wouldn't work for skirmish, there's too many flags and too few players - you'd be split from the start trying to capture the flags and you'll just end up 1v1ing or 2v2ing on a single flag at a time.

 

[schubertt]

The flags would benefit extremely from being linear instead of horizontal to spawns. TF2 Has a gamemode exactly like skirmish called "control points" which is BRILLIANT. It works in TF2 because it is a tug of war between the spawns rather than scattered horizontally.

TF2: Spawn1 >>>>>>Flag>>>>>>Flag<<<<<Flag<<<<<<Spawn2


...........................................Flag................................
Bannerlord: Spawn>>>>>>> Flag<<<<<<<<<<Spawn
..........................................Flag..............................

I'm not particularly familiar with TF2, but that kind of gamemode sounds like it might work best with infinite lives and faster movement than M&B has. Skirmish already has a model for a linear flag set-up in Town Outskirts. In my experience on this map (and without Australian MM servers I haven't played as much as I would've liked), the vast majority of the fights occur around Flag B in the centre, due to the linear design. Every game on that map therefore ends up feeling very samey to me. I think that the strict triangular shape of Xauna and the roughly triangular design of Trading Post work better for Skirmish as it is designed.

Like most Warband players, I still can't see Skirmish as a potential equal to Warband's Battle, and I think that every reason for that has been covered here. The main issue is definitely the economy system and how it allows for heavy armour to dominate. I'd like to see the player's gold pool heavily reduced and also maintained (without the 300g floor) across rounds. To give an example of what I mean, the cost of all classes could be reduced by 100 (also limiting the number of respawns to 3), and players given 160 or so gold to work with at the beginning of the game. Therefore, if someone were to play heavy cavalry in the first round, and heavy infantry in the second, they would be seriously limited with what they can buy in the third round, allowing space for a losing side which saved some money to get back into the match late. Saving money could also offer some strategic options, where teams take blunt weapons and javelins on their weak units and try to steal a win against heavy armour. You could then give out ~100 gold in the fourth and fifth rounds to reinvigorate both teams. I can't say that I expect this kind of thing will be implemented from here, but the economy system does need a change to discourage just buying heavy units and this is one way to do it, whilst keeping them a part of the gamemode.

 

[부부를 넘어서 가자]

Agree with most of this. Really don't like that you (still) see the enemy teams setup after spawning and the wallhack for friendly units.
Also want to add that the spawn system can be abused very hard. If you have 2 or 3 cavs and you manage to catch an enemy out of position and kill him you can run straight to his spawn and kill him 1v3 or 1v2. This will (in most cases) completly take him out of the round. Especially effective in matchmaking where people are slower to react and reslise whats going on.

Overall skirmish isn't even that bad imo, heavily impacted by some classes mechanics and balance problems.
The few matches against good teams were quite fun actually. Getting a proper matchmaking would help alot.

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

The flags would benefit extremely from being linear instead of horizontal to spawns. TF2 Has a gamemode exactly like skirmish called "control points" which is BRILLIANT. It works in TF2 because it is a tug of war between the spawns rather than scattered horizontally.

TF2: Spawn1 >>>>>>Flag>>>>>>Flag<<<<<Flag<<<<<<Spawn2

Yeah I agree some more focused map designed would help a lot. Feels more like Conquest from Battlefield currently.

In regards to your respawn feedback and more specifically your 'single life' solution, there's currently a single life gamemode in the works. Single life just wouldn't work for skirmish, there's too many flags and too few players - you'd be split from the start trying to capture the flags and you'll just end up 1v1ing or 2v2ing on a single flag at a time.

A single life mode would solve many of the problems raised above. I don't have much faith in what they say they have "in the works".

 

[Caps]

Yeah I agree some more focused map designed would help a lot. Feels more like Conquest from Battlefield currently.



A single life mode would solve many of the problems raised above. I don't have much faith in what they say they have "in the works".

sometimes i feel like skirmish would be better if it was 10v10 (or variable) and for ranked you make a 6v6 battle mode

 

[Charlini]

Respawns

-Respawns create a lack of intensity often, instead after the first few kills it ends up with people just trickling one by one. They could wait sure, but why wait when you have outnumbered team mates still fighting or are losing flags? The purpose of respawns was to keep people playing, so seems inevitable that they will just hold W and run to the fight.
-The above ends up punishing pushes and strategies as well - very often I've pushed with the team to take a flag and killed half the enemy team then set about fighting the rest, but during this enemies start respawning as archers in positions with perfect vision of where we're fighting. This is particularly bad on the forest map where they literally cannot be pushed in some spawns that nevertheless have good positions for helping on certain flags.
-Snowballing. Instead of gaining moderate equipment upgrades as a "snowball" in Warband, now teams gain lives as well as better equipment over their opponents. I feel for any new player that manages to make the shot of their life and kill the best player on the opposing team only for them to return as another mega unit. Any skill difference is now magnified by the extra lives a winning team gains.
-Personal preference, but a general lack of tension and reward from the existence of multiple lives. Feels like plays matter less, and attrition matters more (which is its own strategy, but less viscerally exciting for me)

Possible solutions: single life mode, longer respawn time, no heavy classes being able to spawn twice, spawn in waves or only when objective captured. No protected spawns!!!

Regarding respawns and personal preference, for me: Single Life in 6v6 as competitive standard would suck, both for spectators and players, we would complain the same way, it's the game combat & balance what is wrong, not the gamemode. I would wait for combat & balance to be fixed to actually judge skirmish in this regard. I'm quite sure it can provide very tense games and better strategic/stress situations than mere single-life battle with such low numbers.

I'd allow players to choose between the spawn points manually, with ideas of regroup and improving the UI(Perhaps overview of the map when dead, to see where you gonna spawn and some countdown to time limit where it's gonna auto-spawn you). Besides Tork's opinion of having to experiment competitive before deciding meta/overpowered classes & mechanics, I do think that once combat & balance itself is fine, we would need to judge after that, based on competitive experience if people 'autospawn' and just rush to die again or actually play as a team. Imo good players who communicate don't really apply this OGL, but until we get to play the gamemode in proper conditions it's hard to tell, currently its more worth to auto-respawn as cav/archer and just rush back to the never-ending engage as anyone can easily survive exploiting certain flaws.

Snowballing, I completly agree, this gold system encourages snowballing and given the current damage outputs(damage inconsistencies) makes comeback situations extremely hard. I suggest providing the team which losses 2 rounds in a row +50 gold per player. Also the team which wins 2 rounds in a row should get max gold capped from 390 to 370.

Classes

-Armour and Heavy Cav is unarguably superior in every respect, and available on round 1, and you can get 2 lives sometimes from round 1 or at least by round 2. This has created a meta where people are extremely tanky. It's just not fun. By having the goal of making knights etc playable for all, this has had a negative effect on all play.
-Conversely, due to this certain classes are just useless, beyond as a hail mary 4th life. Fine for trolling I guess, but even that aspect is not as enjoyable as custom equipment.

Possible solutions: massively increase the cost of armoured classes, preferably not available on round 1. Alternatively, nerf armour.

Again, I think this addresses to combat&balance. Heavy cav wouldn't be that OP if they were stoppable, able to be killed when stopped(vulnerable) wouldn't knock down completly at almost low speed with such long recoveries for ground troops, Couches and insane manouver/bump ability with W-W / S-S spam etc.

That's why I say that we should focus hard on gold/class balance out of mechanics, once combat, balance & mechanics are worked on. There's stuff as Sharpshooter(140g) + Arbelist(110g) being extremely strong when you stack 390 gold, all of this should be looked at once combat is fixed.

I agree definetly, We just need perk optimisation and provide all classes some usefulness, there's no point in playing without shields on skirmish vs good players, not now nor in the long term. Same way it does not encourage me to play menavlion when I open the perk and aside no shield, I've nothing interesting to pick, out of different type of menavlions(watch other classes with 3 types of arrows/bows). Just doesn't make sense.

Flags

-The 3 flags being there from the start encourages scattered play, in a game where numbers matter greatly every new player is given a bunch of things to head for a so split off to be mown down by cav or a deathball of armoured inf.
-Cavalry capping while being on their horse is a huge buff for them and further creates the scattered feeling of needing to spread out to multiple flags. 1 cav caps a flag miles away, 2-3 public players will often look at that and see "FLAG! Must cap..." Also makes cav essential.
-Frequently fights will end mid fight due to morale dropping, you can argue the losing team should have paid attention, but it is still anticlimactic.
-How the final flag spawns is absolutely not clear. It seems to follow the following spawn as final flag:

- If no flags captured, random
- If 2 flags captured by one side, randomly one of these
- If 1 flag each, the neutral flag
- If 2 flags captured by one side but one is contested, this one
- If 2 flags captured by one side, but one is contested, then another one, while the other team flag is being captured, the first contested one is the final flag

Hopefully you can see how this is confusing and can often be decided by things like a guy just randomly running in as a 2nd spawn on cav. Not good, should be clearer.

Possible solutions: Obvious how the last flag spawns (first flag captured, or cannot be the final flag from previous round, anything clear), Cav must dismount to cap flags, points awarded for capping flags but more if you're near team.

I think you're right over flag spawn patterns, not 100% sure.

I agree overall, we should know accuretly how flag spawns work and summed up to this I would add 2 main suggestions that I did bring on beta.

"Hide classes from interface(Don't allow players to see which class is being played by each player in opponent team) "

"Make last flag raise morale quicker than normal raise speed while all 3 are active "

You can see reasoning for both here.

That's all for now...

THIS NEEDS WORK I AGREE

 

[Juve]

+1 to OP

Also I will never shut up about Heavy Cav costing 200g until Heavy Cav costs 200g.

PREACH

 

[VindictiV]

+1

 

[bblzd]

This puts a lot of what I've been feeling into words regarding Skirmish over the beta and first week of release. The general lack of excitement. I have seen glimmers of hope with more organized teams but the only thing I could think of was to add a lot more people to the mix. Something like 20v20 with 1 life as the maps seem like they could be big enough to support it. But I think you're right about the spawn system and relation to flags could be part of it.

While the class system fits right in on Captains mode I'm noticing now with Skirmish and even Siege it starts to fall apart a bit.

 

[grimsight]

I'll put on my doomer cap and say this game mode lacks any chance of successfully maintaining a competitive community, for all of the reasons outlined above.

When battle servers are out and people start recreating the tried and true battle warband maps that we've played for 8 years, what does TaleWorlds think the competitive base is going to gravitate to?

what we will end up with is a huge divide in the competitive community between the 2 gamemodes, one of which will die quickly (we can assume which one that is). this isn't healthy for the game, remove skirmish from MM and replace with battle.

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

I'm not quite so doomer, matchmaking can act as a funnel with a casual mode that pushes people into the more competitive sections such as certain battle servers or our own matchmaking a la WBMM. It just has to be a) good gameplay b) balanced casual matchmaking and c) fun to play. It has flaws in all 3 right now.

 

[Hero_of_Ferelden]

Skirmish has potential to be better than Battle, but due to the fact that teams (atleast in MM) often fight on multiple fronts, cav and archers will always inherently be superior classes due to their ability to move around quickly and output damage at range.

 

[Sundeki]

Skirmish has potential to be better than Battle, but due to the fact that teams (atleast in MM) often fight on multiple fronts, cav and archers will always inherently be superior classes due to their ability to move around quickly and output damage at range.

Only in Skirmish(and siege, I guess?) where there is multiple capture points. The advantages of infantry are that they can (or at least should, but apparently stationary horses have lightsabers for some reason) stand on a point and, essentially force the other classes to play by their rules if their enemies want to win the round at all. They're also good at flushing opponents out of good/campy positions if need be. In Warband Battle, they could accomplish these tasks, and although Warband Battle had issues with standing around jerking off till the flag spawns, it has been the specific changes that Skirmish has made to the format (more than one life/respawns + multiple flags) that destroy the functionality of the class. Cavalry is stronger in skirmish because it can move from anywhere on the map to anywhere else really quickly. Archers are strong in Skirmish because they are capable of providing fire support on 2-3 points simultaneously, or change between them on a second's notice. The inability to move around or supress multiple positions isn't as damaging to infantry in Battle because there is only 1 point, and once you kill somebody, they're dead. In Skirmish, the person respawns and is capable of either getting to the rest of the fight faster than the infantry (cavalry) or help the rest of the fight sooner (archer) despite losing the engagement to the infantry earlier. The closer the flags, or the smaller the maps are, the less of a problem this becomes. But it also gets worse the more players you have, but even then the other classes are still superior.

Skirmish has the potential to be better than Battle only if you're a Cav/Bow spammer. If you want to play infantry, I can't see any easy fixes to the inherent flaws of the class, or the inherent flaws of the mode (however you want to look at it). Infantry was just better in Battle.