The worst balancing issue in skirmish? Shock Infantry.

[Einarcf]

Make maul and hammer a few points faster. Buff throwing weps with like 40 % dmg (expect throwing spears. Idk about stones). Give Menavlion empire polearm if they pick improved armor. Nerf Voulgier base armor with a couple of points.

Could that work?

*Edit* Oh, and give sperman ability to spawn with glaive.

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

During the Beta loads of people tried to work more closely with the devs and now that we get a chance we rejected it. (Only to hear some new voices asking for more closely work between the community and the devs. It's baffling, isn't it?)

But in the end I think the devs got a bad reputation for no reason. I think they do a solid job, especially recently.
But this honestly isn't the topic here so I don't really want to respond to this anymore here.

Agree and I do think it's great that the devs are actively paying attention to the comp scene now. That said, their reliance on tweaking stats or perks is frustrating when some of these issues have been pointed out for 1+ year, and in some cases being re-experienced, and I also don't think you need to actually see some things to believe it e.g. Cav is quite clearly strong, we don't need a 6 week tournament proving so.

Someone else made a good point also that a lot of this balancing goes out the window when they're going to be adding a third perk soon anyway. Reminds me of all their work on movement and combat, then equipment weight got introduced and the entire game changed. Or crushthrough. And so on. Some of the stat changes are literally irrelevant when some base mechanics are up for change, or should be changed e.g. if you tweak the swing arcs of weapons, which currently are far too large, you'll need to adjust weapon speeds and glancing as well.

 

[TheBard]

You want to hand out a glaive to spear infantry? What?

 

[Silvernj]

But in the end I think the devs got a bad reputation for no reason. I think they do a solid job, especially recently.
But this honestly isn't the topic here so I don't really want to respond to this anymore here.

They posted one patch for 3-4 months and got inf over nerfed even tho Hairless made a topic with beta feedback immediately after the beta patch was released and predicted what would happen.

During the Beta loads of people tried to work more closely with the devs and now that we get a chance we rejected it. (Only to hear some new voices asking for more closely work between the community and the devs. It's baffling, isn't it?)

The current state of the game doesn't need to be tested by highly skilled competitive nerds to realize it's not good. Devs just need to play public skirmish for a couple of hours to know whats wrong, not mentioning numerous already written topics.

Good topic tho.
I don't understand why would we need heavy infantry at all without limits. They're slow, they're weaker in melee than shock infs, just 2 lives at max, they can't catch up with archers fast so they won't be kited (esp with cavs helping).

 

[hoonii]

Make maul and hammer a few points faster. Buff throwing weps with like 40 % dmg (expect throwing spears. Idk about stones). Give Menavlion empire polearm if they pick improved armor. Nerf Voulgier base armor with a couple of points.

Could that work?

It would work, throwing weapons feel kinda useless rn.

*Edit* Oh, and give sperman ability to spawn with glaive.

No, that is not how you buff the spear infantry. Either give them more armor and a new spear altogether, or reduce spear infantry cost back to 120.

 

[Younes]

But in the end I think the devs got a bad reputation for no reason. I think they do a solid job, especially recently.
But this honestly isn't the topic here so I don't really want to respond to this anymore here.

Fair enough

 

[Terco_Viejo]

Pardon my ignorance but what is a skill perk?

Skill perks

Your hair stood on end after reading that statement, didn't it? ?
---
Ikea Knight, OGL is indeed spot on in his last comment.

 

[Einarcf]

You want to hand out a glaive to spear infantry? What?

Why not? What is so different from it and Voulgier? It is more like a band aid really, might not want something like that forever, but at least it gives Khuzait some short term power. To fix their supposed cool special unit, horse archer, might take some time.

*Edit* I don't play inf that often. So take my advice with a grain of salt.

 

[TheBard]

Can we agree to quit the band-aiding? That's not solving the problem imo if we just give another unit another stupid weapon to mitigate poor choices of the past.

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

Can we agree to quit the band-aiding? That's not solving the problem imo if we just give another unit another stupid weapon to mitigate poor choices of the past.

hallelujah ?

 

[OneOrThrEe]

reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee TaleWrolds reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Those new 3rd perks better fix everything and not give us more stuff to complain about reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Also dem horse archers better be a decent counter to shock inf (since buffing skirmishers isn't exacly gonna help khuzait is it now)

Still i know whould've been easier to "argue" with TW about all this if we just do a nice little tournament with no limits.. Between beasts
Lets say
Only 6 DIV A teams, or even 4 ( can be done in a week or 2)
And then finally the answer "you play with class limits" is not going to work ever again ( at least in theory !!!)

 

[Gibby Jr]

imo the solutions should not be focused on non-melee alternatives. archers and xbows are more than strong enough to deal with shock troops given enough time in an engagement, that’s not the issue. heavy infantry need to be able to fight shock troops without it being boring, to the extent that you just run after them with no option other than to block their attack. this s-key meta is very prevalent and anti-fun, not only for competitive players but i can’t imagine how boring and frustrating it is for new players who want to actually fight in melee in their melee game. there is very little incentive to stay close to an opponent in this game because the risk of getting kicked is so high and because you can be kited by shock troops so easily. reducing the impact of shields on movement speed would go a long way to helping this, as it would help heavy infantry to be able to catch shock troops, but i do think the movement speed on shock troops should probably come down a point or two as well, alongside the rebalancing of the strengths of the individual troops each faction has along the lines which Pace pointed out. the stun they apply on side swings is also very frustrating, and i can only imagine the new players questioning why they weren’t able to swing back because it is so inconsistent. that stun should not exist unless the shock troop used a held attack - this might actually incentivise people to use holds with heavy weapons in bannerlord! this change would also help heavy inf be able to fight back whilst maintaining the high damage and effectiveness of shock troops in group fights

 

[MP_Erik]

For Menavlions: Reverse swing damage and thrust damage.
These things are definitely polearms just from the look of it. Yet a swing with the side causes thrice as much damage as a thrust with the point. This would probably balance things up a bit when it dealy with Cav compared to Inf and from what I've read these things were historically designed to deal with cavalry.

I would really be interested in how it would fare as a warband style spear with the upper and lower attacks being high damage thrusts and the side attacks being low damage swings.

 

[AxiosXiphos]

I'd like to point out that the dev's actually do a brilliant job of communicating - you need only read their profiles to see all the very long winded comments and data they offer.

I don't know where Taleworlds got this image of being non-responsive; their team are really hot on responding to stuff.

Compare this to CA - where you will be lucky to get one sentence from them a week; and it is all very hush-hush on what they are working on.

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

Mmm I'd say they are good at selectively responding.

 

[AxiosXiphos]

Anyway back to the point - it was actually myself who mentioned the 3rd perk slot - and honestly I really think they need to implement that before they do any more balancing.

If infantry get a 3rd perk that completely changes how they play - all this changing and balancing might have been for nothing. Consider when we went from 1 -> 2 perks. Any balancing before that is now entirely invalid.

I would love to know some of the things they have planned for this though;

@AVRC - I don't suppose you could drop us a hint on the type of things you are considering for the 3rd slot? We know they are likely skill based perks - but the Singleplayer nowadays has a LOT of options to pick between.

https://www.bannerlordperks.com/perk

 

[Younes]

Ah yes passive perks,

let's just use the arguments during the beta as to why you put this class system in the first place, and then let's just drop them from a 10 story high building.

 

[AxiosXiphos]

Ah yes passive perks,

let's just use the arguments during the beta as to why you put this class system in the first place, and then let's just drop them from a 10 story high building.

Shall we see what they are and how they are implemented before we start complaining?

Like I get you don't like the idea - but it would be at least nice to see what we are complaining about first. For all we know - they will offer visual differences. So the point will be mute.

 

[Younes]

Shall we see what they are and how they are implemented before we start complaining?

Like I get you don't like the idea - but it would be at least nice to see what we are complaining about first. For all we know - they will offer visual differences. So the point will be mute.

My problem is not passive perks, it's TW incompetence at seeing through their own BS when it was called out in the premade classes discussions.

You can make the most stupid design choice in existence, but at least show me that you've actually been planning this, and this was part of a long term and long discussed design choice from the beginning. Do i have to take all TW threads with a massive 5kg grain of salt on anything they claim now?

That is, if they push through with passive perks.

 

[mrArgentum]

Shock inf is just total garbage against 2 2 2 or any other setup where more than 1 archer. So AVRC is right and archers totally counter it. What are you complaining about here? You want to make shock weaker than heavy inf? What the point of this class then?