State of Shield Infantry in 1.5.5

Currently viewing this thread:

OneOrThrEe

Regular
WB
Best answers
0
You're a lab rat like it or not bard :grin:
We could organize no class restriction games without even mentioning beast..
RM vs DM no class restriction when ?
or KW vs DR
or SG vs KW :grin:
 
Last edited:

Ikea Knight

Sergeant Knight at Arms
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
Complaining that inf is in a bad spot but at the same refusing to showcase it is in actual competetiv play is just stupid.
The devs don't like the class restrictions and I am 100% sure that ranked won't limit classes if it ever comes out.

Fine inf get's buffed after the aspects of public matches, where casuals can't even block without a shield. Brilliant.
And when eventually ranked mode comes and nobody ristricts himself to class restrictions- because why would you without administration? - people will realise that the game is still unbalanced for competetiv play.

But hey -we only had half a year of competetiv play where the devs could have collected data for competetiv players that these same players have been crying for over a year.

Goddamit. It's like going to a chess tournament and saying you can't move the ****ing Queen because she is op.

Skirmish competetiv scene is just hindering the progress and limiting themselves and new strategies.

If people really want a 3/2/1 rule we might a aswell call Beast Early Acces Siege Tournament because it certainly isn't ****ing Skirmish.

Inflives matter my ass
 

hoonii

Sergeant
Best answers
0
Complaining that inf is in a bad spot but at the same refusing to showcase it is in actual competetiv play is just stupid.
The devs don't like the class restrictions and I am 100% sure that ranked won't limit classes if it ever comes out.

Fine inf get's buffed after the aspects of public matches, where casuals can't even block without a shield. Brilliant.
And when eventually ranked mode comes and nobody ristricts himself to class restrictions- because why would you without administration? - people will realise that the game is still unbalanced for competetiv play.

But hey -we only had half a year of competetiv play where the devs could have collected data for competetiv players that these same players have been crying for over a year.

Goddamit. It's like going to a chess tournament and saying you can't move the ****ing Queen because she is op.

Skirmish competetiv scene is just hindering the progress and limiting themselves and new strategies.

If people really want a 3/2/1 rule we might a aswell call Beast Early Acces Siege Tournament because it certainly isn't ****ing Skirmish.

Inflives matter my ass
You wanna completely remove class restriction from beast be my guest but if only 5 clans remain don't come back complaining.
People wanna have fun they have the right to preserve it by voting for a class restriction, I understand devs want no restrictions so they can "balance" this thing but the BEAST you're hosting is currently the biggest competitive scene in bannerlord and has the potential to remain as one for a long time so long as devs keep balancing the game and adding interesting features. But removing the restriction will create such a backlash that no one apart from tryhards and devs won't play it anymore because it's such a cancerous time dealing with 3 rngd 3 cav teams that it completely kills the fun and promotes "competitive" tryharding.
avrc said they're planning a weekly tournament, some other people too. Let's not raze a big competitive scene by completely removing the fun and let smaller ones help balancing.
 

Mabons

Knight at Arms
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
My main point to abandon the class limit is, that TW is ignoring our stats, is ignoring our understanding from factions, and is ignoring our opinion about infantry because we use the class limit. And they also said that this will never change. TW is balancing for no class limit.
Yet why does everyone who plays in the current competitive setting prefer it to the random skirmish games? That tells you everything you need to know as a developer, that people prefer infantry groupfights with fringe support classes than having medieval counterstrike.
 

OneOrThrEe

Regular
WB
Best answers
0
I agree with ikea. People want to fix the game, mostly make inf viable. But refuse to effectevly prove to devs in which ways infantry is not good enough.
(Because they want to have fun fun, and only fun. That is why #inflivesmatter is such a big hit right? Cuz we all have fun now why bother trying to change things???)

It was clearly stated that games with class limits are not considered as a proof for skirmish imbalance, since the game isn't meant to be played with them.

People say they don't want to waste months of their time playing a cancer tournament because of archer/cav spam.
But they also don't want to do anything, except cry, about archer/cav spam.

You know even B.E.A.S.T. can be made shorter, elimination style. Blitz beast with no restriction. Why all the paranoia ? If in the longterm it makes the game better for us all. What is with all this nonsense ?

And if you want to have a tournament that has class restrictions and not touch it's sanctity that's totally cool.
But something needs to be done.

I guess idea of AVRC could do the job. Gotta wait and see.


This is not about egos or emotion or whatever. We all want the game to be better. And most people agree that inf needs some love and many dumb things about cav need to go. But everyone is a keyboard warrior, instead of putting in some actual effective lab rat work.

Maybe eventually the game gets more balanced over time "by accident".

Or we as a community can(We should) organize and help out with that.. Point the devs in the right direction with actual proof instead of only opinions, regardless of their validity.
 

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight
Best answers
0
This should be the only game in the world where people ask for nerfs/buffs and get mad if devs ask for proofs. Seriously, what is wrong with devs wanting to actually know if something is really OP, or it is just about people trying to push their agenda?

I am ok if people prefer to play infantry in skirmish mode, and prefer infantry to be the most viable class in skirmish because melee fight is more popular and enjoyable, but instead of overreacting and complaining because devs ask for proofs because the data they are collecting does not match with people opinion, why not just say clearly what you want?:

Infantry being the strongest class in skirmish and most of people picking infantry to enjoy fun melee combats.
 

Forsee

Regular
Best answers
0
I see no problem in inf-based games with no class restrictions, but if inf would be good enough to be able to counter both cav and archers, why would you ever pick more than 2 archers or more than 2 cav?
And if you would, if in a certain situation it would be a better option to spam cav, for example, at this point the game would become trashy for your opponent, thats why people vote for restrictions
 

TheBard

Salt Knight
Sergeant Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
If medieval counter strike and the return couchbots who just have to press x to crush everything else is hailed as "progress" and not seen as a problem and those who don't like this should probably just shut up, then I'm probably just wrong here.
 
Last edited:

Yukmouth++

Sergeant at Arms
Best answers
0
I see no problem in inf-based games with no class restrictions, but if inf would be good enough to be able to counter both cav and archers, why would you ever pick more than 2 archers or more than 2 cav?
And if you would, if in a certain situation it would be a better option to spam cav, for example, at this point the game would become trashy for your opponent, thats why people vote for restrictions
It doesnt matter how you rework the INF, cav and archer create a crossfire environment, that is the problem. Cav players knows best to not charge head first into infs, so they just roam around until they get a chance to hit them in the back. Inf running to archers will end up pierced in the back by cav or arrow in the neck while trying to spear a cav. No matter what you do to inf, as long as people can spam cav and archer and create this over the top cross fire it will be ****. Class restrictions are necessary in a PVP skirmish competitive environment.
 

TheBard

Salt Knight
Sergeant Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
This should be the only game in the world where people ask for nerfs/buffs and get mad if devs ask for proofs. Seriously, what is wrong with devs wanting to actually know if something is really OP, or it is just about people trying to push their agenda?

I am ok if people prefer to play infantry in skirmish mode, and prefer infantry to be the most viable class in skirmish because melee fight is more popular and enjoyable, but instead of overreacting and complaining because devs ask for proofs because the data they are collecting does not match with people opinion, why not just say clearly what you want?:

Infantry being the strongest class in skirmish and most of people picking infantry to enjoy fun melee combats.
You can't make this **** up.
 

OneOrThrEe

Regular
WB
Best answers
0
It doesnt matter how you rework the INF, cav and archer create a crossfire environment, that is the problem. Cav players knows best to not charge head first into infs, so they just roam around until they get a chance to hit them in the back. Inf running to archers will end up pierced in the back by cav or arrow in the neck while trying to spear a cav. No matter what you do to inf, as long as people can spam cav and archer and create this over the top cross fire it will be ****. Class restrictions are necessary in a PVP skirmish competitive environment.
True. With the current state of the game.
Thats the whole point.
Why wasn't cav a big thing in warband competative scene ?
Well for one it wasn't able to outmanuver everything with no risk..
Just for example, if you even played warband, what if horses weren't able to tap WW and SS to quick start/stop.
And what if spears were able to stop cav as effectively as they could in warband.

What we're trying to do in the end is strike balance between units so there is in a way a rock/paper/scissor game going on.
Right now cav is a rock paper and a scissor.

You made this scenario seem a bit too simple IMO. even this is ..
 

Yans

Sergeant at Arms
WBNW
Best answers
0
I stopped counting how many people announced to me they will quit if the class limits get repealed
How many? Idk 10? Or maybe 15?

I'm no lab rat.
You think so? But it's...

Early Access Game
Get instant access and start playing; get involved with this game as it develops.
Note: This Early Access game is not complete and may or may not change further. If you are not excited to play this game in its current state, then you should wait to see if the game progresses further in development.


Its just fascinating how most of the players here created a huge restriction (i mean class limits) for themselves and now crying all over their days in Discords how they bored of the game coz its not changing etc etc.

Pls, "pro players" play 3 BEAST season with almost completely same tactics. That is the real boring thing and not "archers dodging". Looks like some of the teams who spent a million hours in Bannerlord are just not smart enough to develop something more complicated in terms of strategy than "inf push".

It was clearly stated that games with class limits are not considered as a proof for skirmish imbalance, since the game isn't meant to be played with them.
This! But "pro players" think they are core of this game and its true saviors, so developers should ignore what TW wants and make the game "pro" want.
 

OneOrThrEe

Regular
WB
Best answers
0
Ey stop being mean to "pros" :grin:
Either way now is the time for Bard to make a non class restricted tournament just out of spite.
Cmon bard im counting on you
 

Terco_Viejo

Spanish Gifquisition
Master Knight
Best answers
0
How would the game look today if the "pro players" (Gibby, Charlini, OGL, Silen and company) had not been shouldered during the alpha-beta period (June 2019-March 2020)? I don't even want to think about it :roll:. Back then it was time to experiment with the lab rats, we were open to it and it's inconceivable to me how even with all the inherited feedback we have the current balance problems.

If the issues had been dealt with quickly, with patches or weekly hotfixes, from the very beginning, we would be singing a different tune. But of course, in between, a lot of time is wasted in making decisions...see how long the crushthrought issue took for example.
 

Hairless

Squire
Best answers
0
Inflives matter my ass
Rewind time!

Let's hop back in time to pre 1.4.3, actually let's go back in time before BEAST was even a thing. So, in these far far away times, where infantry was completly broken with fast spears, kicklashes and kickthrows flying wild, double Pila and super fast movement speed. It was so broken, that first tryhard matches were DOMINATED by spam tactics. And now you will say "But Hairless, it's old match and has nothing to do with what's happening now. True. BUT Infantry was hella op back then. And what happend?
Here you see RS vs DM in the beggining of DM. We lost horribly playing 4 inf 2 cav, and then 3 inf 3 cav, aganist argentums superior tactic of increasing their cav number by one over our cav number.
And now look what we have here. Insanely op infantry in number of 5 losing to 2:2:2 then 3 cav 2 archers 1 inf. HMHMHMMHMH
"But Hairless, it's only one match and there is probably skill difference that was major factor of that happening." Yes and no. The skill gap was here, obviously RS was better back then. but the difference wasn't that big. BUT what do we have here? DM vs Gibby drama. And what happend in Khuzait vs Aserai? OVERPOWERED 3 infantry 1 archer 2 cav lost to 3 archers 3 cav.But worry not, we countered it by using 6 cavs. Yeah baby, esport.
1:07:11
So, anyone still arguing about removing limits isn't the sharpest tool in the shed.
 
Last edited:

Dextrus

Sergeant
Best answers
0
How many? Idk 10? Or maybe 15?
If that was the actual number it would be enough to wreck a couple Div A Teams and therefor make the Division worthless.

Pls, "pro players" play 3 BEAST season with almost completely same tactics. That is the real boring thing and not "archers dodging". Looks like some of the teams who spent a million hours in Bannerlord are just not smart enough to develop something more complicated in terms of strategy than "inf push".
There is no counterplay to 3 or more Archers in the current patch. Heavy Inf is the class which is best suited for the task because it A has armor, B a big enough shield to block missiles, C has a melee weapon which might acually damage the armored archer and D takes enough of a punch to survive the push. Trying to push with light inf (the natural counter), you will get one hit by the cav and if you push with a horse, it gets decimated.

Heavy inf is so weak and frustrating right now because it is the only logical choice to fight the other expensive classes while being completely outmatched by them.

Archers do more dmg/s from the distance, while being able to kite, while having decent armor, while having the same melee skills, while having better weapons. And that list is compared to heavy inf. 160 Gold archers blow any medium inf out of the water in any regard but the 2h classes. But even those archers beat because they can just shoot the feet.

I wont compare heavy inf to a horseman because I hope we all know how a horseman is better spearman, with 300 more health, who can double tap w/s, with extra armor, who can dodge spear hits, which spear hitboxes are completeley bugged and that can press x at any time without any downside except when they charge a archer head on.
 

Yans

Sergeant at Arms
WBNW
Best answers
0
Here you see RS vs DM in the beggining of DM. We lost horribly playing 4 inf 2 cav, and then 3 inf 3 cav, aganist argentums superior tactic of increasing their cav number by one over our cav number.
And then DM proposed to play with class limit, coz that's the way u could win =)

aganist argentums superior tactic of increasing their cav number by one over our cav number.
one
And now look what we have here. Insanely op infantry in number of 5 losing to 2:2:2 then 3 cav 2 archers 1 inf. HMHMHMMHMH
two
OVERPOWERED 3 infantry 1 archer 2 cav lost to 3 archers 3 cav.
three
But worry not, we countered it by using 6 cavs.
four...

different play styles! Yeah baby, esport

Looks better to me than play 3-4 inf tactics in 90% of matches
 

Hairless

Squire
Best answers
0
And then DM proposed to play with class limit, coz that's the way u could win =)
I mean you just memeing, but I was waiting for this argument for past 6 months. We proved that we can win in any way, but winning with limits is just more enjoyable. No doubt you said that after comming from Res background, which hosted limitless tournament that was completly trash (: and force to play limitless so they can spam 5 archers like they do every random skirmish.