Tournaments are wildly unbalanced

[Gunnerstrip7]

I'm sure most of you are aware of how tournaments work. You are given a weapon set while allowed to bring in your own armor.

This is a fundamentally unbalanced situation, and I think we need to see the return of tournament armor. As it stands, it is wildly unbalanced right now. High-tier units and lords can smash weaker units, who can do nothing about it. This works on the player as well, where you frequently cannot do any damage to enemy lords with your weapon, making tournaments a generally nonviable option for early-game progression. This ends up flipping once you get good armor, the fun is sucked out as very little can kill a fully geared player with the highest tier armor.

I recommend the return of tournament armor, as I feel that would be a simple and viable solution to preserve the intended design of tournaments while also dealing with the imbalance.

 

[Ichon]

I haven't noticed a huge difference due to armour- the high tier Lords or the occasional high tier soldier in tournaments have higher odds of progressing and are notably more difficult to take out but the biggest factor by far is the RNG of the equipment set you get and where you start in the arena.

Had only lost 2 tournaments out of several dozen in the first module I played and in then in the module I started today the tournament threw me into the middle of a melee and I was hit from behind before I could even raise my shield to fight the model in front and in subsequent tournaments, it seemed the player is put right on the edge of opponents instead of having1/3 the distance of the arena to decide on an approach and see where the archers/crossbows are at so not to turn their back to them.

I find the horse-mounted with lance or javelin the best equipment set by far- sword and shield is next, polearm after with bow and crossbow last because between shields and the high-level armour of some characters, the basic bow/crossbow even with a hit does the lowest amount of damage.

To me, that plays into the strategy of tournaments though- if you get a low odds equipment set your first goal is to take better equipment from someone else. Pick up a shield and drop the crossbow.

 

[nemesis234]

I haven't noticed a huge difference due to armour- the high tier Lords or the occasional high tier soldier in tournaments have higher odds of progressing and are notably more difficult to take out but the biggest factor by far is the RNG of the equipment set you get and where you start in the arena.

Had only lost 2 tournaments out of several dozen in the first module I played and in then in the module I started today the tournament threw me into the middle of a melee and I was hit from behind before I could even raise my shield to fight the model in front and in subsequent tournaments, it seemed the player is put right on the edge of opponents instead of having1/3 the distance of the arena to decide on an approach and see where the archers/crossbows are at so not to turn their back to them.

I find the horse-mounted with lance or javelin the best equipment set by far- sword and shield is next, polearm after with bow and crossbow last because between shields and the high-level armour of some characters, the basic bow/crossbow even with a hit does the lowest amount of damage.

To me, that plays into the strategy of tournaments though- if you get a low odds equipment set your first goal is to take better equipment form someone else. Pick up a shield and drop the crossbow.

Actually i did , since you all get the same sword but not the same armor , you will find yourself dealing little damage to other top tier armor. Obviously , the lower armored ppl will always lose if they have the same weapons but not the same armor.

They should have allowed you like in multiplayer , you could all start with basic gear and you could upgrade as you win rounds.

 

[Ichon]

Actually i did , since you all get the same sword but not the same armor , you will find yourself dealing little damage to other top tier armor. Obviously , the lower armored ppl will always lose if they have the same weapons but not the same armor.

They should have allowed you like in multiplayer , you could all start with basic gear and you could upgrade as you win rounds.

Right but if you block (which you should be able to successfully do close to 100% of the time in a 1 v 1) you don't take any damage so armour is irrelevant. It simply takes a bit longer to kill a higher armoured opponent.

Arena battles are closer to what you are suggesting but even more RNG and unbalanced due to 1 life of HP, random spawn of opponents, and no armour on anyone. Even there with some strategy you can have a fairly good chance of winning the entire fight but it definitely is not as reliable as tournaments and has far lower rewards so I think few players bother with it especially as currently arena does not let you grind weapon levels.

 

[ArsLudica]

+1 - I shamelessy strip my companions of all armor before joining a tournament, so that they basically fight naked. that's ludicrous (but also funny).

 

[Ichon]

Actually i did , since you all get the same sword but not the same armor , you will find yourself dealing little damage to other top tier armor. Obviously , the lower armored ppl will always lose if they have the same weapons but not the same armor.

They should have allowed you like in multiplayer , you could all start with basic gear and you could upgrade as you win rounds.

You can tell who is the higher tiered armour in the early rounds of a tournament and make it a priority to eliminate them. That way you hardly ever have to face them in the final round 1 v 1 if you find it difficult. 1 v 1 I find pretty easy, the most difficult round is usually the 2nd to last with 2 v 2 where the opposing team has the highest tier character because your teammate gets eliminated super fast and fighting 1 v 2 is hugely more difficult than 1 v 1.