Weapons and combat balance

[Bladerider]

I want to make some suggestions about the way some weapons work because in my opinion some of them are too powerful while others are of little practical use and there are some other inconsistencies.

Bows and crossbows:
I think that bows and crossbows have a way too high accuracy (90 instead of 99 would be enough) and range (there is almost no drop), not to talk about the fact that for the sake of "gameplay should always trump realism" they deal way too much damage even against heavy armor.
This creates a situation in wich all other players are forced to use shield, being their playing style conditioned by the archers. But there is no way this conditioning works the other way around. If different kind of arrows (one kind doing cutting damage and the other piercing damage) were effective against different kind of armors then at least other class players can force the archers to choose the specific ammunition the same way they are forced to use a shield. The different ammunition could be like arrow types in Chivalry: Medieval Warfare and it would give different type of arrows more depth than just increasing damage.
Link to a video that shows how a leather armor would show different results depending on the ammunition used:

In addition full heavy helmets should prevent any damage from arrows and bolts. It is okay to be hurt by arrows even if you are wearing the heaviest armor but spending huge amounts of gold (that is hard to get in multiplayer) just to die by one headshot, because bows are way too accurate, is just annoying and not fun at all. At least there should be a high chance that headshots bounce away when hitting heavy helmets.

Throwing weapons:
The way it is right now in Warband it doesn't worth it to use javelins in sigle player instead of bow or xbow. And in multiplayer they are only used as secondary (if even) weapon.
This kind of weapons are just too nerfed. Considering the amount of ammo you can carry javelins should be able to one shot all or at least most of the shields and the same for enemies. This way they would be fun to play as primary weapon with a side weapon for the moment you run out of ammo.

Pikes and two handed swords:
https://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/56
Here you stated that pikes will be dropped when you change to the sidearm, which I don't understand considering your statement in the ranged weapons blog about gameplay > realism. Having to take your pike back from the ground each time you have been in the need to switch to the sidearm is annoying.
I am ok with realism, I even like this detail but I would like then to have the same need with twohanded swords. This way we could avoid the weirdness of twohanded swords in the back.
https://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/55
Horsemen lances would be under this situation too.
Even with some bows and xbows it would be interesting to use this feature so an archer that has been so careless that he has needed to use his sidearm is punished in some way.
Since this way pikes and twohanders wouldn't have a scabbard they could be carried this way:

Thrust and overhead attacks:
In Warband swing attacks are limited in a way you can't exploit the game into doing 360º attacks but with thrusting and overhead attacks you can spin while releasing the attack as much as you want. This should be rectified so there are no more weird spinning awlpike users abusing it in multiplayer.

That is all for now.
I hope my english can be understood and the way I have written this is not too messy.
I will edit when I am allowed to post links and images.(Done)
Edited to rewrite a title that I accidentally deleted when I added the images.

 

[Orion]

I think that bows and crossbows have a way too high accuracy (90 instead of 99 would be enough) and range (there is almost no drop), not to talk about the fact that for the sake of "gameplay should always trump realism" they deal way too much damage even against heavy armor.

Making bows & crossbows less precise makes their efficacy dependent on a dice roll rather than skill of the shooter. Reducing their damage makes them unappealing by comparison to other classes (which can already do more damage than archers & crossbowmen can), and the line of argument which says that infantry have to take shields because of archers is flawed. Infantry take shields because shields can block anything, including couched lances (from cav) and throwing weapons (from inf and cav). They also block universally, so you can block melee attacks from different directions simultaneously. To say that archers are forcing infantry to take shields is fallacious.

 

[lolbash]

The different ammunition could be like arrow types in Chivalry: Medieval Warfare

I was almost tempted to discard your entire post because you just made an account today, and mentioned Chivalry, so this almost makes it look as if you are another Chivalry player looking to implement their crappy combat into this game, but I will bite.

I think that bows and crossbows have a way too high accuracy (90 instead of 99 would be enough) and range (there is almost no drop), not to talk about the fact that for the sake of "gameplay should always trump realism" they deal way too much damage even against heavy armor.

In other words, you want to nerf Archers across the board.

I have to disagree. Archers are really not that effective at all, when looking at the grand scheme of things.
The way I see it, Archers exist to put pressure on the enemy, and punish bad positioning. If you reduced their accuracy, they are muh more likely to shoot their teammates. Bad for you, bad for archers, bad for everyone.

As for the arrows being blocked when hit with high armor, in other words, you want to make it so that arrows are effectively useless against armor. With this suggestion, you essentially make archers useless, because their killing power is reduced to only low level low armor players, that it would be better to simply just pick another class like Infantry or Cavalry that can do much better damage against armored opponents.

Sorry, but I am going to have to disagree with nerfing archers.

You getting high level armor should not counter an entire class entirely.

but spending huge amounts of gold (that is hard to get in multiplayer) just to die by one headshot, because bows are way too accurate, is just annoying and not fun at all.

Also being forced to play a different class because one player decided to pick high level armor that makes your niche on the battlefield useless is not fun either.

Not only that, I feel like you are overexaggerating the damage of bows in Warband. I find it hard to believe that you can die in one headshot with the highest level helmet to a bow in this game, even with a War Bow.

So overall, I disagree with an Archer nerf.

If different kind of arrows (one kind doing cutting damage and the other piercing damage) were effective against different kind of armors then at least other class players can force the archers to choose the specific ammunition

We do not need to make an already barely effective class much more complex to play. Disagree with different arrow types doing different damage to different armors.


As for throwing weapons.

This kind of weapons are just too nerfed. Considering the amount of ammo you can carry javelins should be able to one shot all or at least most of the shields and the same for enemies. This way they would be fun to play as primary weapon with a side weapon for the moment you run out of ammo.

Disagree. Most players I know that carry throwing weapons usually carry at least 2 slots. They do massive damage against players and make great counters to horse archers, and infantry who don't use shields.

Thrusting and overhead attacks:

This is already confirmed in Bannerlord.



Also, have you actually been keeping up with updates about Bannerlord Multiplayer?

Because you speak as if you are suggesting improvements that Bannerlord should make over Warband, but you should know that in Bannerlord they overhauled the multiplayer with new features such as Perk system, and Overwatch class system with preset loadouts.

You might want to consider that these changes are now in Bannerlord before thinking about improvements.

 

[Bjorn The Broken]

The suggestions about archers, which are reducing their damage and making them lose their bows or xbows when switching to sidearm, is literally making them a worthless unit to have in terms of gameplay.

The way armors work, which is reducing damage taken rather than making zero damage for cutting move or making arrows bounces off, is an immersive way of realism in terms of gameplay.

 

[bladeex]

隐藏

The different ammunition could be like arrow types in Chivalry: Medieval Warfare

I was almost tempted to discard your entire post because you just made an account today, and mentioned Chivalry, so this almost makes it look as if you are another Chivalry player looking to implement their crappy combat into this game, but I will bite.

I think that bows and crossbows have a way too high accuracy (90 instead of 99 would be enough) and range (there is almost no drop), not to talk about the fact that for the sake of "gameplay should always trump realism" they deal way too much damage even against heavy armor.

In other words, you want to nerf Archers across the board.

I have to disagree. Archers are really not that effective at all, when looking at the grand scheme of things.
The way I see it, Archers exist to put pressure on the enemy, and punish bad positioning. If you reduced their accuracy, they are muh more likely to shoot their teammates. Bad for you, bad for archers, bad for everyone.

As for the arrows being blocked when hit with high armor, in other words, you want to make it so that arrows are effectively useless against armor. With this suggestion, you essentially make archers useless, because their killing power is reduced to only low level low armor players, that it would be better to simply just pick another class like Infantry or Cavalry that can do much better damage against armored opponents.

Sorry, but I am going to have to disagree with nerfing archers.

You getting high level armor should not counter an entire class entirely.

but spending huge amounts of gold (that is hard to get in multiplayer) just to die by one headshot, because bows are way too accurate, is just annoying and not fun at all.

Also being forced to play a different class because one player decided to pick high level armor that makes your niche on the battlefield useless is not fun either.

Not only that, I feel like you are overexaggerating the damage of bows in Warband. I find it hard to believe that you can die in one headshot with the highest level helmet to a bow in this game, even with a War Bow.

So overall, I disagree with an Archer nerf.

If different kind of arrows (one kind doing cutting damage and the other piercing damage) were effective against different kind of armors then at least other class players can force the archers to choose the specific ammunition

We do not need to make an already barely effective class much more complex to play. Disagree with different arrow types doing different damage to different armors.


As for throwing weapons.

This kind of weapons are just too nerfed. Considering the amount of ammo you can carry javelins should be able to one shot all or at least most of the shields and the same for enemies. This way they would be fun to play as primary weapon with a side weapon for the moment you run out of ammo.

Disagree. Most players I know that carry throwing weapons usually carry at least 2 slots. They do massive damage against players and make great counters to horse archers, and infantry who don't use shields.

Thrusting and overhead attacks:

This is already confirmed in Bannerlord.



Also, have you actually been keeping up with updates about Bannerlord Multiplayer?

Because you speak as if you are suggesting improvements that Bannerlord should make over Warband, but you should know that in Bannerlord they overhauled the multiplayer with new features such as Perk system, and Overwatch class system with preset loadouts.

You might want to consider that these changes are now in Bannerlord before thinking about improvements.

This.

 

[Bladerider]

I think that bows and crossbows have a way too high accuracy (90 instead of 99 would be enough) and range (there is almost no drop), not to talk about the fact that for the sake of "gameplay should always trump realism" they deal way too much damage even against heavy armor.

Making bows & crossbows less precise makes their efficacy dependent on a dice roll rather than skill of the shooter. Reducing their damage makes them unappealing by comparison to other classes (which can already do more damage than archers & crossbowmen can), and the line of argument which says that infantry have to take shields because of archers is flawed. Infantry take shields because shields can block anything, including couched lances (from cav) and throwing weapons (from inf and cav). They also block universally, so you can block melee attacks from different directions simultaneously. To say that archers are forcing infantry to take shields is fallacious.

"Making bows & crossbows less precise makes their efficacy dependent on a dice roll rather than skill of the shooter.
Then I want javelins with 99 accuracy so it is not a dice roll.... The accuracy works just as a way to limit range effectiveness. javelins have low accuracy so you don't have a high chance to hit someone that is too far away from your suposed short-mid range. The same can be applied over bows, being much more accurate than javelins of course."

"Reducing their damage makes them unappealing by comparison to other classes (which can already do more damage than archers & crossbowmen can), and the line of argument which says that infantry have to take shields because of archers is flawed. Infantry take shields because shields can block anything, including couched lances (from cav) and throwing weapons (from inf and cav). They also block universally, so you can block melee attacks from different directions simultaneously. To say that archers are forcing infantry to take shields is fallacious."
I may have said that they do too much damage but my suggestion is not to reduce it but to create two kind of arrows/bolts with different kind of armor as target.
The use of shields is influenced by other factors, of course, but archers are the most important factor. Why then would a two hander user carry a shield without a onehanded side weapon? People in multiplayer do this sometimes only because of archers.

The different ammunition could be like arrow types in Chivalry: Medieval Warfare

I was almost tempted to discard your entire post because you just made an account today, and mentioned Chivalry, so this almost makes it look as if you are another Chivalry player looking to implement their crappy combat into this game, but I will bite.

I think that bows and crossbows have a way too high accuracy (90 instead of 99 would be enough) and range (there is almost no drop), not to talk about the fact that for the sake of "gameplay should always trump realism" they deal way too much damage even against heavy armor.

In other words, you want to nerf Archers across the board.

I have to disagree. Archers are really not that effective at all, when looking at the grand scheme of things.
The way I see it, Archers exist to put pressure on the enemy, and punish bad positioning. If you reduced their accuracy, they are muh more likely to shoot their teammates. Bad for you, bad for archers, bad for everyone.

As for the arrows being blocked when hit with high armor, in other words, you want to make it so that arrows are effectively useless against armor. With this suggestion, you essentially make archers useless, because their killing power is reduced to only low level low armor players, that it would be better to simply just pick another class like Infantry or Cavalry that can do much better damage against armored opponents.

Sorry, but I am going to have to disagree with nerfing archers.

You getting high level armor should not counter an entire class entirely.

but spending huge amounts of gold (that is hard to get in multiplayer) just to die by one headshot, because bows are way too accurate, is just annoying and not fun at all.

Also being forced to play a different class because one player decided to pick high level armor that makes your niche on the battlefield useless is not fun either.

Not only that, I feel like you are overexaggerating the damage of bows in Warband. I find it hard to believe that you can die in one headshot with the highest level helmet to a bow in this game, even with a War Bow.

So overall, I disagree with an Archer nerf.

If different kind of arrows (one kind doing cutting damage and the other piercing damage) were effective against different kind of armors then at least other class players can force the archers to choose the specific ammunition

We do not need to make an already barely effective class much more complex to play. Disagree with different arrow types doing different damage to different armors.


As for throwing weapons.

This kind of weapons are just too nerfed. Considering the amount of ammo you can carry javelins should be able to one shot all or at least most of the shields and the same for enemies. This way they would be fun to play as primary weapon with a side weapon for the moment you run out of ammo.

Disagree. Most players I know that carry throwing weapons usually carry at least 2 slots. They do massive damage against players and make great counters to horse archers, and infantry who don't use shields.

Thrusting and overhead attacks:

This is already confirmed in Bannerlord.



Also, have you actually been keeping up with updates about Bannerlord Multiplayer?

Because you speak as if you are suggesting improvements that Bannerlord should make over Warband, but you should know that in Bannerlord they overhauled the multiplayer with new features such as Perk system, and Overwatch class system with preset loadouts.

You might want to consider that these changes are now in Bannerlord before thinking about improvements.

"I was almost tempted to discard your entire post because you just made an account today, and mentioned Chivalry, so this almost makes it look as if you are another Chivalry player looking to implement their crappy combat into this game, but I will bite."
The reason I have mentioned Chivalry is just because it is a game in wich the feature I mentioned is used. I played that game and stopped long ago because I don't like the reverse overhead, ballerina helicopter vanguards and other kind of broken mechanics. So don't worry I don't want Chivalry like gameplay.
"In other words, you want to nerf Archers across the board.

I have to disagree. Archers are really not that effective at all, when looking at the grand scheme of things.
The way I see it, Archers exist to put pressure on the enemy, and punish bad positioning. If you reduced their accuracy, they are muh more likely to shoot their teammates. Bad for you, bad for archers, bad for everyone.

As for the arrows being blocked when hit with high armor, in other words, you want to make it so that arrows are effectively useless against armor. With this suggestion, you essentially make archers useless, because their killing power is reduced to only low level low armor players, that it would be better to simply just pick another class like Infantry or Cavalry that can do much better damage against armored opponents.

Sorry, but I am going to have to disagree with nerfing archers.

You getting high level armor should not counter an entire class entirely. "
My suggestions are the a bit lower accuracy and two ammo types, not reducing the damage overall.
The two type ammo would be like the cutting/piercing mechanic that already works with melee weapons that make an impact on its effectiveness over different kind of armors.
Bannerlord/Blog/56
"Also being forced to play a different class because one player decided to pick high level armor that makes your niche on the battlefield useless is not fun either.

Not only that, I feel like you are overexaggerating the damage of bows in Warband. I find it hard to believe that you can die in one headshot with the highest level helmet to a bow in this game, even with a War Bow.

So overall, I disagree with an Archer nerf."
Your first sentence doesn't have sense at all considering that with the suggestion you only need to carry the appropriate arrows. And if ammount of quivers you can carry stays limited only by the 4 slots limit as it is right now, you could even carry both types of ammo and switch with "x" as you do with javelins to switch between melee and ranged.
About your second sentence, you may survive with a good helmet a heashot from pretty far away or/and from a short/weak bow. In regular range with a long/strong bow you are dead with a single headshot.

"We do not need to make an already barely effective class much more complex to play. Disagree with different arrow types doing different damage to different armors."
As previously:
The two type ammo would be like the cutting/piercing mechanic that already works with melee weapons that make an impact on its effectiveness over different kind of armors.
Bannerlord/Blog/56
"Disagree. Most players I know that carry throwing weapons usually carry at least 2 slots. They do massive damage against players and make great counters to horse archers, and infantry who don't use shields."
I have used javelins against shields and players without shield and I have been in the receiving side too. A shield can survive a full stack of javelins without even ending up broken with the last one. And a player using a leather armor can survive at least two javelins (I talk by experience from both sides).
"This is already confirmed in Bannerlord."
I have been following the news more or less since the announcement in 2012 but I don't remember seeing this. A link would be apreciated.
"Also, have you actually been keeping up with updates about Bannerlord Multiplayer?

Because you speak as if you are suggesting improvements that Bannerlord should make over Warband, but you should know that in Bannerlord they overhauled the multiplayer with new features such as Perk system, and Overwatch class system with preset loadouts.

You might want to consider that these changes are now in Bannerlord before thinking about improvements."
The information released about the combat in Bannerlord is not deep enought to know if it is going to be that different from warband. That is the reason I have used Warband as base for my topic.
About multiplayer this is the information released I remember:
Bannerlord/Blog/51
Can you provide a link to the perk system and Overwatch class system information?
I realise that gold earned in combat may not be the way multiplayer will work in Bannerlord, but I don't have enough information to state otherwise. If we consider that anything could be already implemented then all suggestions would be pointless certainly.


Please refrain from double-posting. If your post is the latest in the thread and you want to say more, use the modify button in the top-right corner. Thanks. - Orion

 

[SirMairaki]

Can you provide a link to the perk system and Overwatch class system information?

The first 30 seconds of this video shows the perk/class system he's referring to. AFAIK, it only applies to the captain mode.

隐藏

As for your suggestions, I think some of it could be interesting (i.e. the two arrow types), but I disagree that archers are over powered; they're good but not to the point of being unbalanced, especially if you work to maneuver around their line of fire. I also don't recall them causing extensive amounts of damage, although 90% of my hours were in M&B, so it could be different in Warband.

I also agree throwing weapons could be buffed a bit (they were good in VC), but they don't need much IMO. I don't think they should be one-shotting shields.

 

[lolbash]

it only applies to the captain mode.

Nope.

https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,375184.0.html

Confirmed by Callum that perks and preset class loadouts is for all gamemodes

 

[Huggles]

Archers are cancer and definitely need a nerf, but not through accuracy. Rather, fire rate, damage, and drop.

Weak bows should be as fast as they are in warband, but have very extreme drop off and will do very little damage to heavily armored opponents.

Strong bows should have decent drop off, consistent damage, but very slow draw times. Think along the lines of strong bows in AD1257, perhaps a tiny bit slower. And they should also prob have more limited ammo.

Crossbows should be an in between

A very good lone archer in warband is simply too strong and can rack up kills like no one's business. With these nerfs solo archers will be weak and archers will be more encouraged to use group work to be strong against infantry, rather than running around the map and 2 shotting basically anything fairly easily. Archers are always very obnoxious and annoying to everyone else on the battlefield who isn't them.

Perhaps to make the cheaper faster bows not feel to bad to use, weaker range could be a seperate class entirely and be more of a skirmisher role. So they have decent melee and don't have to solely rely on their ranged wep being the end all be all. However very strong bows should force the limit to being very weak melee.

 

[Bladerider]

Can you provide a link to the perk system and Overwatch class system information?

The first 30 seconds of this video shows the perk/class system he's referring to. AFAIK, it only applies to the captain mode.

隐藏

As for your suggestions, I think some of it could be interesting (i.e. the two arrow types), but I disagree that archers are over powered; they're good but not to the point of being unbalanced, especially if you work to maneuver around their line of fire. I also don't recall them causing extensive amounts of damage, although 90% of my hours were in M&B, so it could be different in Warband.

I also agree throwing weapons could be buffed a bit (they were good in VC), but they don't need much IMO. I don't think they should be one-shotting shields.

It seems that you are talking about singleplayer, my problem with archers is in multiplayer.

隐藏

To clarify, I missed to type specially.
The point is that considering specially multiplayer we can discuss about the weapon itself instead of losing the focus with other related factors. For example pikes are okay by themselves but in single player you can see pikemen being totally useless because they do overhead attacks instead of thrusting attacks but that isn't a problem with the weapon, it is a problem of AI.

Thank you for the link to the video I forgot about that and I though that it only applied to the new modes too.

Thank you @Rainbow Dash for that info, I missed that. Can you provide link for the other info I asked please?

@Huggles To some extent increasing the drop is one of the ways of decreasing accuracy over distance.

Anyway you all are focusing on the archery, what are your thoughts about pikes being dropped and two handers too for example?

Edited to clarify and avoid future misunderstandings.

 

[Orion]

A very good lone archer in warband is simply too strong and can rack up kills like no one's business. With these nerfs solo archers will be weak and archers will be more encouraged to use group work to be strong against infantry, rather than running around the map and 2 shotting basically anything fairly easily. Archers are always very obnoxious and annoying to everyone else on the battlefield who isn't them.

In what world do you live in where an archer all by himself is so devastating? Archers can rack up kills when they are left alone & can fire freely at enemies which aren't paying attention to them. The only way this happens is when there are players other than the archer to focus on, which is to say when the archer has teammates to distract enemies for him. I don't see a problem with this at all, as cavalry operates under very similar circumstances.

Weak bows should be as fast as they are in warband, but have very extreme drop off and will do very little damage to heavily armored opponents.

Strong bows should have decent drop off, consistent damage, but very slow draw times.

K, so, keeping it the same as Warband? Because that's literally how they are in Warband. More powerful bows shoot arrows at higher velocity, and thus have flatter trajectories. They also have a significantly slower rate of fire compared to smaller, weaker bows (Short bow speed: 97, Nomad bow speed: 94, War bow speed: 84, Long bow speed: 79). Damage values vary greatly across the range of bows available (18p for the short bow to 25p for the war bow, difference of 7), but we must also remember that speed bonus applies to projectiles, so bows with higher velocity--associated with bows that have higher base damage--also have more consistent damage output at greater distances.

The combined effect of lower speed bonus and lower base damage makes short & nomad bows weak against armored opponents already. It is necessary for bows to still deal some damage to opponents wearing the best possible armor, as archer melee stats were nerfed so hard that they will easily require in excess of 10 melee hits to kill them. No other class is put in a position where their opponent can forego blocking entirely and spam them to death with practically no risk, and so archers must retain their usefulness in other ways.

Specifically regarding the trajectory of arrows, remember that when you are firing in third person the drop of projectiles seems less significant than it actually is for the beginning of the arrow's flight, after which it reaches a point where its drop appears to increase significantly. This is due to the optical phenomenon called parallax, where the alignment of the arrow's trajectory and the shooter's camera angle are offset. This is why you can fire in third person at an object just a couple meters away and your arrow will actually impact your target above your point of aim. If you shoot in first person, there is no parallax and you will see that projectiles have fairly consistent and noticeable drop throughout their trajectory. I've explained this before, so I have some handy images to help illustrate this:

隐藏

The green line is the axis of the third person camera, the blue line is the axis of the first person camera angle, and the red line is a trace of an arrow's trajectory. Notice how the blue line and red line begin aligned, and the red line consistently pulls away from the blue line. Then, notice how the red line starts offset from the green line, then actually gets closer to the green line before pulling away near the end. The parallax point is where the green and blue lines intersect.

隐藏

These arrows were fired at a moderate range (across about a third of a city scene in singleplayer), and it illustrates how parallax affects your impact point when aiming at a target beyond the parallax point.

All of this being said, I wouldn't mind if bows had slightly reduced rate of fire across the board. Accuracy should remain high and damage could be tweaked a point or two, but they're in a decent place right now. We will have a good opportunity in Bannerlord to make sustained rate of fire for bows slower than in Warband without making the draw time awkwardly long, because drawing an arrow from your quiver and nocking it is a separate animation from drawing the bow in Bannerlord. This would allow bows to be drawn fairly quickly--though not as fast as loaded crossbows can be aimed--while still reducing their rate of fire, which is not currently possible in vanilla Warband as reloading & drawing is a single action.

 

[lolbash]

Actually, the firerate in bows are nerfed in Bannerlord. If you look at the recent captain mode videos there is now an extra animation where the player pulls the arrow from the lower back by turning his arm.

This is much slower than pulling out an arrow from over the shoulder.

 

[Sundeki]

Actually, the firerate in bows are nerfed in Bannerlord. If you look at the recent captain mode videos there is now an extra animation where the player pulls the arrow from the lower back by turning his arm.

This is much slower than pulling out an arrow from over the shoulder.

And yet at the same time when you cancel your "attack" the arrow disappears back into your quiver in Warband. In Bannerlord it stays on the bowstring. So in some situations the firerate is increased.

 

[FBohler]

Let me tell you people, if you want Chivalry, you better go ahead and play Chivalry.

Please let Bannerlord be just a Mount&Blade game!

 

[Bladerider]

Let me tell you people, if you want Chivalry, you better go ahead and play Chivalry.

Please let Bannerlord be just a Mount&Blade game!

As I said to RainbowDash I only mentioned Chivalry because the feature is there, it is not like I have invented it.
Anyway, you could consider all the post and not just the archery part.
And it is interesting how the most "away with you to play Chivalry" replies to my post are from two guys that want a hitting multiple people feature, wich is the most Chivalry gameplay like thing to add to Mount and Blade.

隐藏

https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,376933.15.html

 

[Orion]

Actually, the firerate in bows are nerfed in Bannerlord. If you look at the recent captain mode videos there is now an extra animation where the player pulls the arrow from the lower back by turning his arm.

This is much slower than pulling out an arrow from over the shoulder.

It's so much easier drawing from a hip quiver in reality, in my experience. What makes it slower in Bannerlord (compared to Warband) is that it's a two-step process, where the bow is "reloaded" and fired in separate stages. You can draw an arrow from your quiver, nock it, and then wait to draw your bow in Bannerlord. This is visible in gameplay videos we have seen. This also lets TaleWorlds adjust the speed of "loading" a bow independently of drawing & firing it. It has nothing to do with the location of the quiver, which for gameplay purposes is purely aesthetic.

Anyway, you could consider all the post and not just the archery part.

Fine. Dropping pikes & lances when switching to other weapons is a matter of realism more than anything. You can't just wish away a 10-foot pole. Two-handed swords, on the other hand, are often not so long & heavy that they are cumbersome to carry on your body.

隐藏

This guy you posted in the spoiler above is obviously an exception, but bear in mind that he's clearly from a time period long after Bannerlord's setting, as well as being the victim of artistic liberty. He has no protection on his lower legs or face, and his sword is a little over-sized. Two-handed swords are mostly anachronistic for Bannerlord's time period anyway, but those that may have existed wouldn't have been comically large. Scabbards would be feasible for them, though I would suggest a long draw time for them compared to one-handed swords.

As for archers dropping their bows...  That's like saying horsemen should have to dismount if they wanted to use a sword. Asking them to give up the defining feature of their class is a little ridiculous. Plus, bows in Warband are either worn across the body (which is awkward but workable in reality) or dropped into a sheath, neither of which take much time to do in reality.

Throwing weapons are fine. They're not very accurate, but they're distinct from bows & xbows in that they only require a minimum of one slot instead of two. This allows infantry and cavalry to take a one-handed melee weapon, a polearm, a shield, and a ranged weapon all at once. They also deal considerable damage, reliably one-shot-killing decently-armored opponents with headshots. Making the most common (and sometimes free) throwing weapons break shields with one or two hits would be ludicrous. They're not meant to be a primary weapon, that's why they deal high damage and have low ammo. If you want a ranged primary weapon, then use a bow or crossbow. That's literally what they are for, whereas throwing weapons are typically thrown at the beginning of an engagement to disrupt formations.

 

[Bladerider]

Actually, the firerate in bows are nerfed in Bannerlord. If you look at the recent captain mode videos there is now an extra animation where the player pulls the arrow from the lower back by turning his arm.

This is much slower than pulling out an arrow from over the shoulder.

It's so much easier drawing from a hip quiver in reality, in my experience. What makes it slower in Bannerlord (compared to Warband) is that it's a two-step process, where the bow is "reloaded" and fired in separate stages. You can draw an arrow from your quiver, nock it, and then wait to draw your bow in Bannerlord. This is visible in gameplay videos we have seen. This also lets TaleWorlds adjust the speed of "loading" a bow independently of drawing & firing it. It has nothing to do with the location of the quiver, which for gameplay purposes is purely aesthetic.

Anyway, you could consider all the post and not just the archery part.

Fine. Dropping pikes & lances when switching to other weapons is a matter of realism more than anything. You can't just wish away a 10-foot pole. Two-handed swords, on the other hand, are often not so long & heavy that they are cumbersome to carry on your body.

隐藏

This guy you posted in the spoiler above is obviously an exception, but bear in mind that he's clearly from a time period long after Bannerlord's setting, as well as being the victim of artistic liberty. He has no protection on his lower legs or face, and his sword is a little over-sized. Two-handed swords are mostly anachronistic for Bannerlord's time period anyway, but those that may have existed wouldn't have been comically large. Scabbards would be feasible for them, though I would suggest a long draw time for them compared to one-handed swords.

As for archers dropping their bows...  That's like saying horsemen should have to dismount if they wanted to use a sword. Asking them to give up the defining feature of their class is a little ridiculous. Plus, bows in Warband are either worn across the body (which is awkward but workable in reality) or dropped into a sheath, neither of which take much time to do in reality.

Throwing weapons are fine. They're not very accurate, but they're distinct from bows & xbows in that they only require a minimum of one slot instead of two. This allows infantry and cavalry to take a one-handed melee weapon, a polearm, a shield, and a ranged weapon all at once. They also deal considerable damage, reliably one-shot-killing decently-armored opponents with headshots. Making the most common (and sometimes free) throwing weapons break shields with one or two hits would be ludicrous. They're not meant to be a primary weapon, that's why they deal high damage and have low ammo. If you want a ranged primary weapon, then use a bow or crossbow. That's literally what they are for, whereas throwing weapons are typically thrown at the beginning of an engagement to disrupt formations.

My point about pikes being dropped is that if we consider realism for pikes we should do it with other weapons too. Two handed swords can't be carried on the back:

隐藏

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoMLrKInT8g

隐藏

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQBfNoi28Z4

隐藏

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjURzgkCuAE

A hand and half sword like a bastard sword could be carried on the side in a sheath but not a twohanded one, neither in the side or the back.
The picture is just one of the very few I found and as you stated twohanded swords are not from the period anyway.

The archers dropping bows is in the same way of, why realism only being applied to pikes? Some composite bows may have some kind of case, but a bow like the english long bow can't be carried in a case or worn across the body. Having it worn across the body wouldn't be good for the bow anyway.
A pike user has the pike as his defining feature too, he is a pikeman and while using the pike he is exposed to arrows and can't do anything with the pike if other infantry engage in close combat. So the chances of a pikeman having to use a side weapon are much higher and not that much in his own fault.

It may be different in Bannerlord but in Warband throwing weapons need points invested in power throw as melee needs power strike and archery power draw, arguing that while the point investment is the same they have to be relegated to be a secondary weapon is not fair. The damage as I already stated in other comments is not really that high and headshots are not that easy. And for skirmishers it can perfectly be the primary weapon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javelin There you can see some historical examples. And to show the importance they were given: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jereed

 

[FBohler]

Why are we discussing balance of a game that:

1) Isn't ready yet;
2) We haven't tried yet;
3) Isn't balanced yet.

 

[lolbash]

Pikes being dropped I can see balance reasons why it is implemented.

We know pikes are a direct counter to Cavalry, however if you can have your Jnfantry team charge the Pikemen, they are forced to drop the pikes to fight, and that allows the Cavalry to charge in and kill people.

 

[jamoecw]

damage type is currently tied to launcher rather than ammo (M&B, WB, etc.). this came up with early mods to balance the game to make it more realistic.

as for shooting your own guys this was fixed in WB, before it was tied to accuracy and meant that low enough accuracy would cause your archers (or other ranged units) to shoot their own guys.

in M&B it was possible to have weapons on horseback that you couldn't use, and you could start the battle with it but not switch to it. this was fixed in WB, though to get the effect you are looking for you would simply need to change this back and allow such order of operations to allow such an effect for foot as well.


maybe BL will be as moddable as they make it seem and all of this will be possible, otherwise it probably won't be as they seemed to have moved away from such nuances.