Swaida and heavy bias

[Khal]

Now, I know a lot of you look at swadia as your home faction and that faction you always want to play, but this is getting out of hand. I play this game daily on a server which usually gets pretty even win/lose scores, but as soon as Swadia appears on a map, opposing team gets blown up every single time. 2hers as fast as 1hers and as long as great long axes and the best heavy cavalry in the game with great lances, all their units also has access to heavy armour. They just sweep the field like some sort of materialized version of the black plague.

I can see the philosophy behind the other kingdoms.
Nords has extremely good infantry, but all their other classes are very, very weak.
Rhodoks has average everything (And IMO the best crossbows since they can get sledgehammers, that's a personal opinion though)
Sarranids has good archers and good cavalry, but lackluster infantry
Khergit has great mounted forces but completely lacks infantry
Vaegirs has the best archers, but horrid cavalry and lackluster infantry

It's all good, all more or less balanced, Nords might be a bit too powerful, but it's nothing a good team playing on their advantages can't overcome.

Now Swadia.
Swaida fields the best cavalry in the game, but they also field infantry equally good to the Nord infantry (Minus the Nord throwing weapons) this makes no sense in the general design since they have two advantages, one average and no fatal disadvantages to make up for it. This causes a general swadia build to just roll over any other force of equal skill which makes the games extremely dull from both perspectives.

Swadia either needs a heavy infantry nerf or a heavy cav nerf, they need a visible disadvantage. My suggestion is that you slow down the 2h swords a lot, remove the bastard sword (Alternatively make it duel server exclusive to avoid ****storm) and keep cavalry as it is, since knights are supposed to be extremely potent cavalry.

This would cause them to have worse infantry than nords, much better cavalry and slightly worse ranged, making it fairly balanced versus the other kingdoms while still not crippling the bulk of the Swadian forces too much. At the moment, Swadia is not fun to play nor to play against.

 

[Askorti]

I'd suggest making their stuff much more expensive.
Mainly horses, and maybe armour of mounted units.
Their crossbowmen should be worse than they're now. (to make a difference between Swadian and Rhodokhai crossbowmen)
Infantry... Maybe worse stats? smaller amount of hp and weaker hits?

 

[AWdeV]

I suggest **** you, this is bull****. Holy cow. Yes, Swadia has fast and good swords. Yes, Swadia has crossbows. Yes, Swadia has effective (in theory) cavalry. But no, they're not overpowered.

Why not? Because everyone and their grandma has a very good counter against them; Shield. Swadians DO NOT HAVE any efficient infantry anti-shield weapon. The only thing Swadia has that's effective against shield is couched lances. But everyone has those and great lances, which you wholly exaggerate, really aren't worth it. They're slow, expensive and can't be used to block. A man-at-arms entering a match with a great lance will likely be poorly armoured, riding a saddle horse and having a low quality shield. Which means they're equipped solely as offence and not even particularily good offence due to the crummy horse.

Now, Nords, they're rather powerful. Their archers aren't so bad due to the fact that they can use longbows and two-handed axes, their cavalry is versatile and their huscarls are downright deadly. Their shields are the absolute best for melee-combat and their one-handed axes make short work of everyone elses' shields! Swadian infantry really can't go toe to toe with Huscarls, that really is nonsense. Huscarls have the best stats for infantry, huscarls have the best shields. Huscarls have powerful one-handed axes. Huscars have powerful throwing axes to reduce shields even more.

 

[kingofnoobia]

The OP heavily underestimates several classes of other factions (Vaegir horsemen, Nord archers and Sarranid footmen, to name a few, which are all very decent) while exaggerating the qualities of Swadian troops, especially infantry (no, they're really not as good as huscarls, not even close). Two-handed swords are all fine and shiny, but they are massively worse than axes when it comes to fighting opponents with shields. And great lances may be powerful, but it's a matter of preference. A good deal of players pick the heavy lance over the great lance, even if they can afford the latter, and most factions are able to buy heavy lances. I'll admit, Swadians have powerful swords, armour and lances, but their weapon selection is so limited they simply don't have a response to every situation. In tactics, I'd say Swadia is one of the most rigid factions of all. So no, they aren't overpowering.

 

[Askorti]

You don't need to destroy a shield to kill it's user... And to be honest with 2hander I always have better time than with pole-axes, they're too slow and (in my opinion) feels kinda clumsy..
and btw  Rhodoks(except hammers, but they're slooow) and Khergits don't have anything anti-shield too, but they're doing pretty well.
In my opinion Swadia should have good cavalry (MAYBE even better than now) but weaker infantry. In 1 vs 1 there's no match for 2handers...

 

[kingofnoobia]

You don't need to destroy a shield to kill it's user...

In a public TDM server, indeed not. Once you meet a proper player, you do though.

 

[RalliX]

I certainly hope you guys have been listening to Narrator, cause he has skills.

"Skills in multiplayer don't mean you understand the game in a better, or deeper way, RalliX."

Well sir, If this was your response, then you surely know nothing about this game.
_______________________________________
Swadia is indeed, perfectly balanced. In fact, It's probably the most balanced faction I can think of, with the exception of the great lance, but that's another story.

Let me refer you to this little(big) post here: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,145028.msg3489629.html#msg3489629

All factions are balanced in multiplayer. How do we know? Nords no longer have free throwing axes. 

Seriously, if you keep losing, it's simply because you and your team are not better than the other team, or the teams are uneven.

 

[FrisianDude]

and btw  Rhodoks(except hammers, but they're slooow) and Khergits don't have anything anti-shield too, but they're doing pretty well.

Don't Rhodok picks have bonuses against shields? Don't Khergits have axes to one-handed axes?

Also; OP, just you equip yourself as a 1000 denar Swadian infantry and then fight Vaegir infantry with Great Long Bardiches etc. You need to time your attacks very much just right in order not to get cleft in twain.

Also; Swadia is my favourite faction but I never use Great Lances because they are slow as **** and are really only useful couched. And as you well know, pretty much anyone paying attention has good responses against someone who couches his lance.

 

[Mulek]

Don't Rhodok picks have bonuses against shields?

IIRC, the picks don't have the bonus. But they have hammers.

Don't Khergits have axes to one-handed axes?

They have axes to axes 


It's easier to fight with sword and board than with a 2H - between two players with equal skills, the s&b one will win.

I really didn't notice any unbalance between factions...

 

[RaVeN]

I am not going to correct your OP Swadia argument because your derp derp avatar asked me to.

 

[RalliX]

Don't Rhodok picks have bonuses against shields?

IIRC, the picks don't have the bonus. But they have hammers.

Don't Khergits have axes to one-handed axes?

They have axes to axes 


It's easier to fight with sword and board than with a 2H - between two players with equal skills, the s&b one will win.

I really didn't notice any unbalance between factions...

About the bolded statement: It really depends of what skill level you're talking about, and what weapons are used for both sides.
Often, I can beat any shielder of average skill with a long axe or great-sword. I guess I kinda consider myself in the upper skill regions though, when it comes to 1v1 combat.

I can usually survive long enough to rip off a shielder of equal skill's shield. So unless he is as skilled in manual blocking as I am, then he will have a hard time winning.

This is why it depends on weapons. If he was a weak shield, I can tear it off rather quickly with any two-hander, but if his shield is 'heavy' then I'll need an axe of some kind. However, if I meet a player of equal skill, with a huscarl shield or heavy shield, and I don't have a two-handed axe, then I have no advantage, and he's likely to win unless I can out-feint him.

Like I said, it depends.

 

[Grimfros]

Based off of experience, I can say Sarranid Footmen are almost just as good as Nord footmen, they have Throwing jarrids, cloth armour, run fast, and still seem to take many hits, and their axes are almost equivalent and have good shields, Why Sarranids have Axes? I don't know I didn't think Arabs used Axes at all.

I've had MANY problems against Swadian Infantry, because Axe's lack speed, and weapon reach, their two handers seem to rip through my shields, or hit faster/before I can swing or get close enough, so you end up only being able to time a flaw, or risk charging in with your shield/good enough manual blocker and the right timing to take their two-handers down.

Nord Archers aren't so bad since they can get short, and longbows. I'm content with their ability. And the Cavalry is pretty bad.
Not only that but Sarranid infantry get maces, and though manoeuvrability can avoid a mace and kill anyone wielding one, it doesn't stop a single hit from knocking you over, and then getting another one in for the kill.

But that's just against Nords. I can't exactly say how well they do on others, and perhaps all races have their weaknesses, Nords being cavalry and two handed infantry, or any fast weapon for that matter.

 

[FrisianDude]

1. Sarranid infantry only just got jarids in the release of today, have you played that already?
2. Just because you didn't think it, doesn't mean it is. Everybody had axes all over the world, so it's only logical that a lot of cultures decided to adapt axes to to a combat role. See also;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabar_Zin , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabar , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_axe#Overview
3. Not sure how Arab the Sarranids are. Seem more like Berbers, a bit, to me.
4. What exactly is your point, Grimfros? first you mention Sarranids and then it's suddenly Swadians again?  Also Two handed and great swords are not exactly the best weapons against shields, and if they rip through yours I'd suggest buying a shield in stead of taking the free ones.

 

[Víkingr]

Why Sarranids have Axes? I don't know I didn't think Arabs used Axes at all.

I think you'll find they did.

 

[Lord Brutus]

Even native Americans had axes.

 

[The_Freeman]

I have to say, 2handed swords are a bit too fast or do too much damage, one of the two things should be nerfed a little. But the only real problem I have with swadians are the Greatlances, I experimented a bit lately and I found that literally NO weapon, not even pikes, can outrange Greatlances, meaning that when you are not against a noob that just charges at you blindly in a straight line but actually turns while in charge to use the full reach of the Greatlance you absolutely can't deal with him alone, you can either block until he tires and try to couch (but you are probably going to get killed by his team) or you can try your luck and get destroyed.
This of course is even worse with factions such as Nords that have just the warspear as their longest weapon.

Now, I'm not saying that Swadian ALWAYS wins when it's in the condition of using Greatlances, but if you look at a typical match you will have the top swadian players with tons of kills and only a couple of deaths running around on a charger in full armour, then you have all the other players that either go xbows or infantry that are doing a very poor job, mostly because the other faction at one point will just avoid cavalry and go for the mostly abandoned by themselves players. For short, when you win against Swadia in an open field it's because typical horseman players are selfish a-holes that don't support the team and just want kills.

For me this is worse then whit Khergits, they at least require a lot of skill to use horse archers properly and don't waste all their arrows and even then horse archers are very vulnerable against ranged troops. And lancers are far from invincible, they are average cavalry with normal lances.

tl,dr: I believe that a weapon (Greatlance) that if used at full potential has no counters (as I said pikes don't work if the Greatlance is used correctly) it's imbalanced and it's relying only on the ignorance of the players to give a semblance of balance.

 

[FrisianDude]

Great lance does have counters though, you stab your pike at the horse. Rarely have I seen players with the full Swadian panoply (including great lance) Yes, they can be very dangerous in skilled hands, but most hands aren't that skilled.

 

[The_Freeman]

I know that, but if a horseman turns while charging the horse is no more in a foward position, thus you can't stab him with a pike before the great lance hits you, so your weapon simply can't reach neither the horseman nor the horse, the greatlance will always hit you first.
As for the "there are not many skilled players", yes, but read the bottom of my previous post: it's a semblance of balance, an illusion. I don't think that a weapon that to be balance must be used the wrong way is balanced at all.

Keep in mind, I tested all this stuff quite a lot and I am a skilled horseman-killer, if a horseman plays in a less-then-perfect way I can and I will stop his horse with a stab or kill him right away.

 

[Renneko]

This of course is even worse with factions such as Nords that have just the warspear as their longest weapon.

My trowing axe out range a greatlance!

Now, I'm not saying that Swadian ALWAYS wins when it's in the condition of using Greatlances, but if you look at a typical match you will have the top swadian players with tons of kills and only a couple of deaths running around on a charger in full armour, the

And if you look on what kind of kills the make, Backstabbing, backstabbing and did i mention backstabbing?

Most "top horseman" don't have any skills at all, there just backstabbing,

 

[The_Freeman]

Your trowing axe can indeed be a pain for a Horseman but: you only have a limited amount of them and in a typical tdm or battle with let's say around 30 players you are going to use them fast, even if you hit with every single one, they are expensive and few (and shileds are also there to make some of your hits a null). Of course if you die a lot I suppose you will not run out of axes, but that kinda defeats the purpose doesn't it?
The greatlance doesn't "run out" it's a melee weapon that when used on horseback (obviously) has only ranged counters. How fair is that?

As for the backstabbing, yes I agree, but there is not much one can do to balance backstabbing isn't it? Also, it's often lack of teamwork that allows a horseman to backstab, infantry running in the open without support and without looking behind them hardly qualifies as a balance problem.