[Suggestions] for Viking Conquest.

Users who are viewing this thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
sentinel329 said:
Bows work fine. I played my first playthrough as a archer and could sharpshoot and take down unarmored troops easily. The bows are not super powerful as they are in native Warband though. they will not destroy shields, nor will they one-shot armored troops.
Yes, on the first patch(on release) the bows wasn't with this lame speed rating, so you could shoot a bunch of arrows in a unarmored enemy to kill him, try the bow now and see that they are not "work fine". =S
And I'm not expecting to kill a fully armored shoot with one hit, but with a accuracy of 85 of the bows and speed rating 60 you need to land 3-4 headshots in a enemy using a helm? This is aweful. Again, in this DLC almost all troops have great athletics skills(including you) and shields, you don't need to worry about:"oh, if they ajust the bows I will never be able to play as infantry again" or "No, I don't want all my troops getting killed by arrows."
Why the purpose of ranged weapons in the history:
  • Throwing/sling weapons for use against enemies at mid/close range.
  • Bows for use against unarmored/medium armored enemies at long/mid range.
  • Crossbows for use against heavy armored(no s**t) at long/mid range.
For now only throwing weapons are working. Because of the new ranged system, the throwing weapons are making all the roles. The bows are only working against enemies at close range when you score a headshot(If the enemy is using a helm, the bow is just useless, because you only have time to one shoot when they are at close range). :S

I'm just proposing a rebalance/rework in the ranged weapons because it's really frustating that the DLC doesn't have functional ranged weapons(except throwing) because the players doesn't like to get killed by archers/crossbowmen. The intention of the Mount&Blade is have a precise and realistic combat(the most possible), thats why in MB system you will get killed sometimes by: Spears, horsemen's lances, arrows, javelins, axes, etc. It's all part of the game. :smile:
 
FelipeII said:
sentinel329 said:
Bows work fine. I played my first playthrough as a archer and could sharpshoot and take down unarmored troops easily. The bows are not super powerful as they are in native Warband though. they will not destroy shields, nor will they one-shot armored troops.
Yes, on the first patch(on release) the bows wasn't with this lame speed rating, so you could shoot a bunch of arrows in a unarmored enemy to kill him, try the bow now and see that they are not "work fine". =S
And I'm not expecting to kill a fully armored shoot with one hit, but with a accuracy of 85 of the bows and speed rating 60 you need to land 3-4 headshots in a enemy using a helm? This is aweful. Again, in this DLC almost all troops have great athletics skills(including you) and shields, you don't need to worry about:"oh, if they ajust the bows I will never be able to play as infantry again" or "No, I don't want all my troops getting killed by arrows."
Why the purpose of ranged weapons in the history:
  • Throwing/sling weapons for use against enemies at mid/close range.
  • Bows for use against unarmored/medium armored enemies at long/mid range.
  • Crossbows for use against heavy armored(no s**t) at long/mid range.
For now only throwing weapons are working. Because of the new ranged system, the throwing weapons are making all the roles. The bows are only working against enemies at close range when you score a headshot(If the enemy is using a helm, the bow is just useless, because you only have time to one shoot when they are at close range). :S

I'm just proposing a rebalance/rework in the ranged weapons because it's really frustating that the DLC doesn't have functional ranged weapons(except throwing) because the players doesn't like to get killed by archers/crossbowmen. The intention of the Mount&Blade is have a precise and realistic combat(the most possible), thats why in MB system you will get killed sometimes by: Spears, horsemen's lances, arrows, javelins, axes, etc. It's all part of the game. :smile:

In a previous post about ranged you wanted people to explain why ranged is like this ingame without mentioning 'In history...', yet now you're claiming it should be rebalanced to be powerful based on history?

Combat of the era in this part of the world did not have a heavy emphasis on bows, lines of archers or archer-heroes. If you want an era that does favour ranged more then native warband is pretty perfect to simulate that. To simulate realistic combat the player-character in campaign is encouraged to get into the fray in melee, because that's historically where the action was had at this time. An argument could be made for the change in multiplayer to make it competitive and balanced, but that's so broken anyway i dont know if that's a priority. Also if bows became powerful in this game, people would be less likely to play in a realistically 'viking era' style, in which case what is the point of the DLC?

Balance at the moment encourages/forces you to fight in a 'Dark Age'/Viking style, and that's how a Viking DLC should be. If there was a Robin Hood or 100-years-war DLC then i'm sure ranged would have more of a role to play.
 
JuJu70 said:
kraggrim said:
SIx95.jpg
Make pectoral muscles less pointy.

what's wrong with man-boobs? :grin:


HEY! I resemble that remark  :lol:
 
Heskeytime said:
In a previous post about ranged you wanted people to explain why ranged is like this ingame without mentioning 'In history...', yet now you're claiming it should be rebalanced to be powerful based on history?

Combat of the era in this part of the world did not have a heavy emphasis on bows, lines of archers or archer-heroes. If you want an era that does favour ranged more then native warband is pretty perfect to simulate that. To simulate realistic combat the player-character in campaign is encouraged to get into the fray in melee, because that's historically where the action was had at this time. An argument could be made for the change in multiplayer to make it competitive and balanced, but that's so broken anyway i dont know if that's a priority. Also if bows became powerful in this game, people would be less likely to play in a realistically 'viking era' style, in which case what is the point of the DLC?

Balance at the moment encourages/forces you to fight in a 'Dark Age'/Viking style, and that's how a Viking DLC should be. If there was a Robin Hood or 100-years-war DLC then i'm sure ranged would have more of a role to play.
Could not agree more! Good post.
 
i'd like every settlement close to water to be accessible, like in Ribe by North there is just a boat laying there, but i have to enter it on foot. raiding would get a lot better, or taking over a castle in a naval assault would be pretty cool too.
and also, danish vikings and norwegian vikings should be colored too, maybe under command/protection of a jarl or something, and attacking them will cause loss of relationship with certain lords
 
Here's a big one, please fix the map to make it look accurate! It should look more like L'aigle's map. Seriously, why is Denmark so long and at just about the same latitude as England? Why is Britain so skew and not parallel to France?
 
Reposting this from the other thread:

Content!
Bug fixes are vital and all, but variety is the spice of life and VC doesn't have a whole lot of variety right now, and making your next update an actual update, not just a patch would be awesome

More armour would be nice I suppose, never hurts
To add to this, let your modeller go wild, I know you really love your authenticity, but just because a helmet is dated to being 50 years before, or a sword to 30 years later, doesn't mean it may not have been in use at that time still, and who really cares, when it's close like that?

A Frankish faction, with some heavier cavalry would be very nice, much later on of course, when the more basic stuff is all done and polished, but it'd offer a different play style and one that a lot of players like (this is Mount and Blade after all)

A bit of a buff for slings and bows, I get they're meant to be support weapons, but it's neither fun nor accurate (and I know you guys are all about your accuracy) if it takes 3-4 shots to the face to kill a guy with no face protection, and on that note, one of those viking helmets with chains hanging down covering the face, the name escapes me

Some kind of 2h axe (Not a Dane axe, let's not get into that!) and maybe a throwing axe, or even a normal axe you can throw
 
And another suggestion.  :lol:
Check the armor/weapons characteristics. The armor values of mail armor is too high! Or maybe from different point of view the weapon stats is too low.
I saw several times the scene like this: 20+ guys surround one mail wearing guy and trying to take him down. He was usually last for half a minute or so, while receiving dozens and dozens of hits. It's like the Iron man against the gang of neanderthals armed with sticks!  :lol:
 
Ok, I might repeat some already said stuff, even though I tried to read as many of discussion as I could, it has become a lenghty one XD What I'll say is based on my personal experience in the game and what I think that could make it better, or most of time, what I think that was frustating. Some is from things from Brytenwalda that I think would be nice to have and I think it wouldn't be too troublesome since, well, it's yer guys stuff already.

1) Reports. Brytenwalda had some kinds of reports that I would enjoy seeing in this DLC, like companion report when buying stuff. Also, would be nice to have something to list places I'm authorized to recruit on.

2) Better troop tier view. Again, in Brytenwalda, when looking at the troop tier I could click one and see it's stats. That would be nice to have since sometimes I get in a region, look at the troops and see two branches of foot soldier and wonder wich one have wich strengths/weakness. In that fashion, I also would like to see a list of possible equipment of theese troops.

3) Troop level/training, actually, is hatefull. Got some peasants/farmers in the team. They're level 12. Peasants level 12. Saw other troops in wich the lower tier level were way higher than that.  My character and heroes have to level up a lot before they can give experience due to trainer skill to theese troops. When they're able, the soldiers require so much experience to level up that the meager XP from trainer, even maxed, means it would take some long weeks for them to become second tier. Ok, I don't expect my character to make a dozen huskarls in a week, but trainer skill now seems to me like being useless. In native, trainer was one skill that made me feel impact in game, since in the beggining of game raising an army is always hard, but at mid term of the game you can, in a couple days, raise a second tier troop army, and in the late game, a week could give you, without engaging green troops in danger, a team of third tier troops. And that's one good thing in my opinion, made me felt like really advancing in the game, since the ability to keep a good army later on came from the ability to raise one. Men die in war.

4) Seaside fort. I would like to build my camp seaside and make it my personal port. Also would be nice that some forts were water acessible. Not having coastal setlements, I can live with, I don't see too much trouble porting near and raiding, but I would like to keep my ships in a personal cove and hiring a shipbuilder to repair and build my own fleet away from the lord (Floki, is that you?)

5) I kind of feel the mid game wanting. All right, I got a couple dozens of men, and began walking around. Suddenly, every thieves/brigand/ruffians band I find is too weak, and I only found something in my level occasionally in ships. The lower thieves are a lot, but at some point they're a waste of time. And every lower-lord have at least a hundred men. Not much space to someone between 20 and 100 troops (ok, I could simply follow my marshal and hope he doesn't do something stupid. But I would like to... do more). The realms could have "generic mercenaries". Like you, sometimes a realm contract a veteran warrior, old captain or someone like that, that builds armies of 20-100 men and patrol around and go on campaings. They would appear from time to time spawning on big towns and forts, with likehood of appearing and strenght based on a level between the wealth of the kingdom and of the particular place/lord, and last a while if undefeated, eventually giving up they'r contract and going to a friendly/neutral town and dispersing. They would focus on raiding villages, caravans and peasants, while the actual lords would focus on forts and towns.

6) Women. There are kingdons with ridiculousy few ladies for a bachelor.

7) Many already said this, weapons and armor diversity. I know we're in 800 but... Walked on earth, bought an axe and a long bow. Weeks later, haven't found anything between my plain shirt and a mail armor. Oh, nice, there are dozens of different shirts, with collors and hoods, as well as a hundred collors to shoes. Of equal stats, or close enough. Then there's a LEAP to mail armor. Wich cost a fortune. Errr... ok, the time era. But... some half mail, hard leather, heavy fur, cooper breastplaque, something... the actual leap between lower tier armor and nearly-last tier is huge and there's so much need of something in the middle. Same goes for weapons. Got a long bow soon enough and saw noting better except a strong long bow so far. Saw several different saux, of nearly same stats. Haven't seen almost none two-handed weapons. no big hammers. The way it is, there's not much choice except axe and shield or sword and shield. Ah, and the shields... same as with shoes.

:cool: As of now, mail is good. Very good. And trully, mail armor is excelent agains swords and cuts (anyone ever saw deadliest warrior? A Katana can't even scratch a good mail armor, impressive). But piercing damage should outshine it. That should happen, and would ake spears nicer. Also, piercing damage should have more probability of causing severe wounds than slashing (that was on of the reasons the romans used the gladius to pierce more than cut).

9) Would like to see more religion stuff. People took religion much seriously that time, it would be nice to be able to do things like sacrifice cattle or prisioners before battle to improve moral of a pagan army, or stopping to pray for absolving sins after a battle for a christian one (what matters, I'm pagan, hail Odin, let us burn those monasteries down to the ground!)

10) In that line, now people take religions more seriously (according to patch notes, I still haven't seen much impact). Would like to see religion of troops and lords (actually, i'm assuming they follow the religion of they'r common land).

That's a lot, and certainly with spelling mistakes (not english native). There are other things, but I said enough for a lifetime already.
 
First off, sorry to poster above, that is way to long for me to want to read it.
Second, have they given an ETA when they will start doing content updates? I heard they plan to do it once most of the bugs are patched, and besides fps drop when entering town scenes and stuff that seems about done. Ha anyone heard?
Also third, I know bowman were an extremely rare thing back then, but they were still good. Archery is just pointless is in this dlc, I believe arrows should be able to pierce heavy armored people, but take like 4 hits to kill. Anyone else should take like 2 hits, or 1 headshot unless they have the helmet of freaking god or something a helmet aint going to help getting shot in the face. My suggestion, make archers expensive as hell to maintain.
 
Shonin said:
3) Troop level/training, actually, is hatefull. Got some peasants/farmers in the team. They're level 12. Peasants level 12. Saw other troops in wich the lower tier level were way higher than that.  My character and heroes have to level up a lot before they can give experience due to trainer skill to theese troops. When they're able, the soldiers require so much experience to level up that the meager XP from trainer, even maxed, means it would take some long weeks for them to become second tier. Ok, I don't expect my character to make a dozen huskarls in a week, but trainer skill now seems to me like being useless. In native, trainer was one skill that made me feel impact in game, since in the beggining of game raising an army is always hard, but at mid term of the game you can, in a couple days, raise a second tier troop army, and in the late game, a week could give you, without engaging green troops in danger, a team of third tier troops. And that's one good thing in my opinion, made me felt like really advancing in the game, since the ability to keep a good army later on came from the ability to raise one. Men die in war.
I disagree strongly. Training men is already really quick. If you have armour penalties turned on, light troops are actually quite useful. If you like to have higher tier troops just recruit them from cities and castles (and even villages). Just do a few quests for them so that you gain higher relations with them and there you can recruit insta second tier or even third tier troops. Since money is easily obtained via trading, looting and pillaging there are no problems with that. On addition to that you can hier a trainer for your refuge. And by the way: Would your character and your companions not be of a far higher level anyways, so training should not be a problem?

What I would agree with is that low tier troops should die easier than higher tier troops. I thought one of the devs said, that higher tier troops would not die as easily in combat than low tier troops, but in my game the high tier units are always the ones dying.

Shonin said:
4) Seaside fort. I would like to build my camp seaside and make it my personal port. Also would be nice that some forts were water acessible. Not having coastal setlements, I can live with, I don't see too much trouble porting near and raiding, but I would like to keep my ships in a personal cove and hiring a shipbuilder to repair and build my own fleet away from the lord (Floki, is that you?)
That is a nice idea.

Shonin said:
7) Many already said this, weapons and armor diversity. I know we're in 800 but... Walked on earth, bought an axe and a long bow. Weeks later, haven't found anything between my plain shirt and a mail armor. Oh, nice, there are dozens of different shirts, with collors and hoods, as well as a hundred collors to shoes. Of equal stats, or close enough. Then there's a LEAP to mail armor. Wich cost a fortune. Errr... ok, the time era. But... some half mail, hard leather, heavy fur, cooper breastplaque, something... the actual leap between lower tier armor and nearly-last tier is huge and there's so much need of something in the middle. Same goes for weapons. Got a long bow soon enough and saw noting better except a strong long bow so far. Saw several different saux, of nearly same stats. Haven't seen almost none two-handed weapons. no big hammers. The way it is, there's not much choice except axe and shield or sword and shield. Ah, and the shields... same as with shoes.
Ther are lots of alternatives and the variety of armour and weapons is excellent. You have tunics of various quality (usually between 15/1 to 20/4), various gambesons as light and medium armour (mid tier, usually between 26/9 to 31/14) and byrnies (medium armour, low high tier usually between 46/20 to 52/23?) and mail (heavy armour, high high tier, usually 51/23 to 58/ 2x, or even 62/27?? <- quest reward storyline). There is really everything there you need. You are equally wrong on weapons:  There are various versions of axes (depending on your fighting style, seaxes, swords and a huge variety of spears, various forms of shields (round, pictish square shields, h-shields, etc.) plus bows and slings. I honest to God do not know what or some of the other complainers in that regard still want. I like to have a game with historical accuracy. There are literally thousands of games out there which have all the weapons and armours regardless of time frame and culture. I for once am happy that here we finally have developers who actually care about historical accuracy and immersion!

Shonin said:
:cool: As of now, mail is good. Very good. And trully, mail armor is excelent agains swords and cuts (anyone ever saw deadliest warrior? A Katana can't even scratch a good mail armor, impressive). But piercing damage should outshine it. That should happen, and would ake spears nicer. Also, piercing damage should have more probability of causing severe wounds than slashing (that was on of the reasons the romans used the gladius to pierce more than cut).
Piercing damage is better than all other forms of damage, because armour has a weaker soak factor against piercing than against cutting damage. But if that is not enough for you you can easily change that by just changing the soak factor for piercing damage in your module.ini file: just open it with any text editor, find the line "armor_soak_factor_against_pierce    = 0.65" (without quotation marks) and change the last value. The lower the less the armour can soak damage. Save and you are good to go.

Shonin said:
9) Would like to see more religion stuff. People took religion much seriously that time, it would be nice to be able to do things like sacrifice cattle or prisioners before battle to improve moral of a pagan army, or stopping to pray for absolving sins after a battle for a christian one (what matters, I'm pagan, hail Odin, let us burn those monasteries down to the ground!)
hire some of the wandering priests and you can do that! Talk to bishops or gothik.

 
Heskeytime said:
In a previous post about ranged you wanted people to explain why ranged is like this ingame without mentioning 'In history...', yet now you're claiming it should be rebalanced to be powerful based on history?

Combat of the era in this part of the world did not have a heavy emphasis on bows, lines of archers or archer-heroes. If you want an era that does favour ranged more then native warband is pretty perfect to simulate that. To simulate realistic combat the player-character in campaign is encouraged to get into the fray in melee, because that's historically where the action was had at this time. An argument could be made for the change in multiplayer to make it competitive and balanced, but that's so broken anyway i dont know if that's a priority. Also if bows became powerful in this game, people would be less likely to play in a realistically 'viking era' style, in which case what is the point of the DLC?

Balance at the moment encourages/forces you to fight in a 'Dark Age'/Viking style, and that's how a Viking DLC should be. If there was a Robin Hood or 100-years-war DLC then i'm sure ranged would have more of a role to play.

I won't repeat my argument every f***in time anyone got pissed thinking that I wan't the bows become in this DLC as powerful as they are in Warband.
The facts are:
  • The bows/slings are useless/broken for now, would be amazing if they balancing it, because for now, Doesn't makes sense you have any ranged troops, except skimirshers who have throwing weapons.
  • No, for the last time, I don't expect the bows became: Powerful as they are in warband, one hit kill, etc etc. "Fire & Sword" already give a good experience in fantasy of the "Robin Hood-one-hit-kill".
  • The vikings has bow as a hunting and battle instrument, you can find it in various texts in literature, HERE a example.
Heskeytime, Don't get confused, I'm not suggesting a buff in bows based in their strenght in the history. What I tried to say is:"The bows has a ROLE in history, as the ranged troops has". Nobody would defend your land and family doing something that doesn't have effect at all, like throwing cotton against invading enemies. =S
A rebalance in ranged weapons wouldn't kill the Viking combat style, It would add a wider arc in your strategies and better imersion in sieges/naval sieges. :smile:
 
FelipeII said:
stuff about bows

Dude, you should create a new thread about bows, copy your posts there and link it here. Kind hard to follow any discussion on a thread that has 1000 different ideas being posted around.

You can edit or remove/add new post with link and a short quote about it if you want to bump the discussion on the suggestion thread.


My 2cents
 
kalarhan said:
FelipeII said:
stuff about bows

Dude, you should create a new thread about bows, copy your posts there and link it here. Kind hard to follow any discussion on a thread that has 1000 different ideas being posted around.

You can edit or remove/add new post with link and a short quote about it if you want to bump the discussion on the suggestion thread.


My 2cents

Sorry, I didn't mean to be repetitive and annoying. I just feel the obligation to answer the misunderstoods about my suggestions.
For now I will wait a fews patches to see what the devs will update and look for anothers suggestions that I can give. :wink:
 
The ability to rebind the sailing keys is really needed.
Right arrow doesn't work properly on my keyboard, and I don't think using the numpad right arrow works, which makes naval battles a case of waiting for the enemy to sail to me
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom