SP - General Some perks need a rework. Every perk should provide a noticeable change and not just a tiny percentage stat boost

[nuekboi]

By and large, the perk system is pretty good (minus the fact that it doesnt work right now, but still). There are two main issues with it I have ATM

1. Too many tiny percentage stat boosts, especially early on in weapons skills. 1.5% more damage with two handed weapons is pointless as a perk because as a player you will never notice it, especially since you get a percentage damage boost for leveling up combat skills anyway. The Trade perk tree is the best in terms of providing you something noticeable and substantial with every perk you pick instead of "2% better prices".

2. Health perks. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is there no way to increase health besides the three melee skill perks and one medicine perk. It's kinda strange that a stat like health is locked behind perks, and that you can only increase it so marginally. Health in RPGs is not literally how many hits a guy can take before dying, but how much brunt a person is able to endure before going down. It doesn't make sense that an elite level 26 soldier is only marginally stronger than a peasant in that regard.

I think the devs are already working on point 1, considering they still haven't fixed the perks. I am guessing they have a larger rework planned. I don't know if point number 2 will be addressed though, and I'm curious what others think of it

 

[MightyMidgit]

Agreed on wanting to feel a difference when I select a perk. A lot of perks are like that (or would be if they were implemented), but a lot also aren't.

 

[Rycon Caldestan]

Callum has confirmed multiple times over the past EDIT few (not feeble) days that perks are in the process of being overhauled. I’m really looking forward to seeing what their next iteration of the system will look like

+Health perks have a secondary issue in that it increases how much you have to heal in order to be battle ready (20% of hp). You don’t heal any faster for having more hp, so despite being “sturdier/healthier” it take you longer to heal from critical injuries.

 

[nuekboi]

Callum has confirmed multiple times over the past feeble days that perks are in the process of being overhauled. I’m really looking forward to seeing what their next iteration of the system will look like

+Health perks have a secondary issue in that it increases how much you have to heal in order to be battle ready (20% of hp). You don’t heal any faster for having more hp, so despite being “sturdier/healthier” it take you longer to heal from critical injuries.

Good to hear that.

Damn I didn't know that's how it worked. Yeah, I think health system needs a rework. Maybe not Ironflesh like Warband, but there should be some physical different between level 30 and level 5 in terms of how many hits they can take

 

[eddiemccandless]

Good to hear that.

Damn I didn't know that's how it worked. Yeah, I think health system needs a rework. Maybe not Ironflesh like Warband, but there should be some physical different between level 30 and level 5 in terms of how many hits they can take

Yes, it is ridiculous that it takes the same number of arrows to down a looter and a Palatine Guard (minus armor, but even that doesn't make that big of a difference).

 

[Rycon Caldestan]

Good to hear that.

Damn I didn't know that's how it worked. Yeah, I think health system needs a rework. Maybe not Ironflesh like Warband, but there should be some physical different between level 30 and level 5 in terms of how many hits they can take

Edited my post from feeble to few. Yay autocorrects .

But in terms of health, I do like that there is similarity in health. Being an emperor, a battle hardened veteran, aristocratic tourney monger, or peasant levy doesn’t change your likelihood of surviving a great axe to the face or arrow through vitals. There absolutely needs to be variance in HP, but not (IMO) to a mmo “game-y” level (which I don’t think you are proposing)

Armor IS a better determination of protection than an arbitrary level. That stated armor vs damage calculations are definitely in the process of being balanced.

 

[nuekboi]

Edited my post from feeble to few. Yay autocorrects .

But in terms of health, I do like that there is similarity in health. Being an emperor, a battle hardened veteran, aristocratic tourney monger, or peasant levy doesn’t change your likelihood of surviving a great axe to the face or arrow through vitals. There absolutely needs to be variance in HP, but not (IMO) to a mmo “game-y” level (which I don’t think you are proposing)

Armor IS a better determination of protection than an arbitrary level. That stated armor vs damage calculations are definitely in the process of being balanced.

I get what you mean, but I think we both have different understanding of what HP means. Mount and Blade is an RPG. A more realistic one at that but still an RPG. In real life you don't have an arbitrary HP bar that represents how many times your can get stabbed in the chest without falling down. In certain tabletop RPGs like D&D your HP represents not necessarily the absolute amount of health your character has, but rather their fighting force, or how much of a beating they can take while still fighting effectively. A seasoned war vet should be able to take more of a beating and still keep on fighting vs. a literal peasant who doesn't which end of the spear to point at the enemy.

Mind you I don't think high level troops should have god tier health. 150 health for T6 troops would represent being able to take an extra hit or two unarmored at normal difficulty, and I think that makes sense. Combine that with rebalanced armor and we should solve the issue of high tier troops getting shredded by archers

 

[Dr-Shinobi]

Good to hear that.

Damn I didn't know that's how it worked. Yeah, I think health system needs a rework. Maybe not Ironflesh like Warband, but there should be some physical different between level 30 and level 5 in terms of how many hits they can take

meh you weakling ....but you do due to perks and armor which they buffed in combat. I dont want to become more durable in battlefield then i am now with only medium armor and skills or else its gonna get to easy

 

[King Yngvar]

By and large, the perk system is pretty good (minus the fact that it doesnt work right now, but still). There are two main issues with it I have ATM

1. Too many tiny percentage stat boosts, especially early on in weapons skills. 1.5% more damage with two handed weapons is pointless as a perk because as a player you will never notice it, especially since you get a percentage damage boost for leveling up combat skills anyway. The Trade perk tree is the best in terms of providing you something noticeable and substantial with every perk you pick instead of "2% better prices".

2. Health perks. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is there no way to increase health besides the three melee skill perks and one medicine perk. It's kinda strange that a stat like health is locked behind perks, and that you can only increase it so marginally. Health in RPGs is not literally how many hits a guy can take before dying, but how much brunt a person is able to endure before going down. It doesn't make sense that an elite level 26 soldier is only marginally stronger than a peasant in that regard.

I think the devs are already working on point 1, considering they still haven't fixed the perks. I am guessing they have a larger rework planned. I don't know if point number 2 will be addressed though, and I'm curious what others think of it

There's a huge difference, the warrior can afford mail while the peasant is only wearing a tunic. As of now though, armor doesn't work properly, so let's just fix that instead of increasing health too much.
I'm fine with the small boosts, power strike was ridiculous in Warband. I am concerned about the one handed perk that supposedly makes shield force fields larger. That means there might be a hidden shield skill that will be a pain to mod out to get rid of the magic force field.

 

[King Yngvar]

I get what you mean, but I think we both have different understanding of what HP means. Mount and Blade is an RPG. A more realistic one at that but still an RPG. In real life you don't have an arbitrary HP bar that represents how many times your can get stabbed in the chest without falling down. In certain tabletop RPGs like D&D your HP represents not necessarily the absolute amount of health your character has, but rather their fighting force, or how much of a beating they can take while still fighting effectively. A seasoned war vet should be able to take more of a beating and still keep on fighting vs. a literal peasant who doesn't which end of the spear to point at the enemy.

Mind you I don't think high level troops should have god tier health. 150 health for T6 troops would represent being able to take an extra hit or two unarmored at normal difficulty, and I think that makes sense. Combine that with rebalanced armor and we should solve the issue of high tier troops getting shredded by archers

Why does it have to be the hitpoints again for you? Just make the armor better. Arrow damage could be a separate category from cut, blunt and pierce. It could be made to work very poorly against metal armor.

 

[Dr-Shinobi]

There's a huge difference, the warrior can afford mail while the peasant is only wearing a tunic. As of now though, armor doesn't work properly, so let's just fix that instead of increasing health too much.
I'm fine with the small boosts, power strike was ridiculous in Warband. I am concerned about the one handed perk that supposedly makes shield force fields larger. That means there might be a hidden shield skill that will be a pain to mod out to get rid of the magic force field.

what you mean armor not working prop ? man armored troops can tank now for ages and you can take a lot of hits now with yours.
And dont get me started about horses....I saw one tanked like 170 in damage. So well since im down for compromises ive been quite about that. But to buff it even more then im gonna be pissed

 

[nuekboi]

Why does it have to be the hitpoints again for you? Just make the armor better. Arrow damage could be a separate category from cut, blunt and pierce. It could be made to work very poorly against metal armor.

Fair enough. Whatever it takes to make armor actually matter. Right now I feel like I'm watching a hollywood movie in terms of how easy it is for arrows to **** up armored troops

 

[xdj1nn]

Callum has confirmed multiple times over the past EDIT few (not feeble) days that perks are in the process of being overhauled. I’m really looking forward to seeing what their next iteration of the system will look like

+Health perks have a secondary issue in that it increases how much you have to heal in order to be battle ready (20% of hp). You don’t heal any faster for having more hp, so despite being “sturdier/healthier” it take you longer to heal from critical injuries.

considering that they've locked all interesting perks (the first time around) behind nearly unreachable skill levels, I am not exactly expecting much out of it. (said "cool" perks were mostly not even working) Also the trees are unbalanced, redundant perks are an issue, and some of the "Forced" choices were too ridiculous while we've had "no-choice" perks that had the same level of usefulness as a comatose snail...

Considering that they have absolutely zero experience creating complex build systems (which would be required for BL with a Perk System), I think this might be the worst feature even after the game is properly finished and officially released. I do love this, having a perk system, but how they do it can either ruin the entirety of the game, or make it a million times better, so far it's really badly designed (the entirety of Character progression). So my best bet is that they'll turn it into a "meh" thing.

 

[nuekboi]

considering that they've locked all interesting perks (the first time around) behind nearly unreachable skill levels, I am not exactly expecting much out of it. (said "cool" perks were mostly not even working) Also the trees are unbalanced, redundant perks are an issue, and some of the "Forced" choices were too ridiculous while we've had "no-choice" perks that had the same level of usefulness as a comatose snail...

Considering that they have absolutely zero experience creating complex build systems (which would be required for BL with a Perk System), I think this might be the worst feature even after the game is properly finished and officially released. I do love this, having a perk system, but how they do it can either ruin the entirety of the game, or make it a million times better, so far it's really badly designed (the entirety of Character progression). So my best bet is that they'll turn it into a "meh" thing.

Main problem right now is the insanely exponential xp spike once you get to double digit levels. They need to reduce the multipliers for both leveling up and skills so we can actually see high tier perks in action

 

[Dr-Shinobi]

Main problem right now is the insanely exponential xp spike once you get to double digit levels. They need to reduce the multipliers for both leveling up and skills so we can actually see high tier perks in action

Strange ive almost reached to the end in 3-4 irl playdays so shouldnt take that long. But well some actually wants a game to last at least one weak i prefer 2 or more depending on how much playtime i do. but at least one week is resonable for an M&B game