Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Silveredge

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 19
16
Suggestions Corner / Re: Shield Rebalancing
« on: February 22, 2018, 08:29:53 pm »
Ideally we could get some form of tiered rewards for shield skill, imo. For instance if you invest 1 - 3 points you get a rather significant increase in the forcefield of the shield, but barely any increase in shield speed or durability, leaving you with a slow, weak shield which is primarily going to be useful against ranged only. Then when you're investing your 4th - 6th points you get minimal return on investment for the invisible bubble against ranged, but now you get substantial increases in speed and durability, since you're really only investing this many points if you want to be using the shield in melee. Finally for your 7th+ skill invested you just get a small increase in all stats of the shield, speed, durability and forcefield, with diminishing returns so it never gets too out of hand, giving you full-body coverage against ranged or an unbreakable shield. Obviously this would take some coding know-how, if it's even at all possible, but It'd be a decent way to go about giving people what they want out of their shield skill, imo. Let those bringing it along just to counter ranged have a decent shield+forcefield to hide behind, and let those bringing it into the melee with them have a useful tool to assist them, not hinder them.

That, and #LetUsRunFastWithShields

Having high shield skill would make you really familiar with your shield, making it apart of you and not a hinderance.  That would make sense to me.  If only one day I could learn how to not treat a crossbow and bolts like it weighed 15 metric tons...  :wink:

17
The Chamber of Tears / Re: Maybe FIX THE GAME?!
« on: February 22, 2018, 09:03:58 am »
Uhhhhhhhh........

A wise man once said:
same shit, different year.  :rolleyes:

Players with no technical aptitude being dummies and ranting about something they don't know and never even bothered to learn about.

Let's just delete 3-4 years of code from 10+ other devs and hope it matches 2013 gameplay....

And then....  there are just so many examples it's painful, these are only a few, from the very years they are asking for...  Seems like those weren't the glory years either...

Waste of breath and brain cells to worry about these two:

"and I am not leaving because of anything within the game like its players, shitty half-developed Strategus, or the fact that cavalry is too hard these days"

I am

....we asked for fixes....and got donkeys...im done

Hopefully see a lot of you when Bannorlords come out, hopefully i see none of the Teuton \ AoW people

so sad....you nerf everyones poleaxe...and buff minor single swords no one uses once they get past that diff.  you know what made the poleaxe so effective in real life? its because it excelled in all areas, thrust cut AND blunt. nerfing\boasting is one thing...but to nerf 3 points...ahhh, i was enjoying this mod, but i think im done.

Your first statement is the exact wrong thing to do imo, and its kinda what they did, they used a server more populated\used over one that isn't ( idk about you , but i loved NA siege, its my goto mode, i havent actually played CRPG for a bit, im waiting for this to get fixed )

I know it would have been harder to completely build the server from the ground up rather then piggyback off of Siege, but imo, they shoulda used the Rageball server.

I fully and 100% agree...Conquest should have its own server...i miss straight up siege, and its the reason i left. No fun playing regular siege, then jumping into a mode that lasts 20 mins, then the next round the other team doesn't even spawn.

Whats even more frustrating is crossing your fingers hoping to jump into regular siege,,,and getting stuck with 20 min of x1....then not spawning the next round :(

I miss CRPG, but to much Battle\DTV gets boring for me, i always found Siege the most intense exciting mode

I have played crpg for 1.5 year now. I have spent 99% of that time on EU2.

Why?

Well i dont care much for waiting several minutes to respawn.
I dont like being oneshot by lance cav, or bumpslashed by cav, or kited and shot to pieces by HA, HX.
I dont like being shot to shit by big groups of ranged and no cover to speak of that i can hide behind.
I dont enjoy the kind of cowardly gameplay that battle encourage, stay alive long enough and your team wins HURRAY.

Siege offers fast and constant action, action with a purpose (take flag, defend flag, open doors, close doors)
If i get shot or couched or ganked by a group of players i can respawn and either try to backstab them in turn, or i can do something else.

If battle had some sort of purpose other than camping "better" than the other team it might catch my interest a bit more. Master of the field flags spawning or something.
But i would have to play with a shield and a spear just to survive against all the fucking cav and ranged.

I want 4 attack directions. I want manual blocking.  Anything else is just lackluster


So in short,  fuck battle, its always been the shittiest gamemode. Finally people are beginning to realize that. Grats,

Nothing about this post makes any sense. You are compairing totally different things as if they were the same.
Have a % chance on a swing connect to instantly win the fight is not the same as a varying dmg amount on factors you can control.

And interesting that you list crushtrough, which is even more fucking gay than knockdown. A noskill feature that adds notthing of value to the game. As well as couched lance damage.

Things that reduce the level of skill required to win are bad for the game.

But i guess some people need them crutches,  cav couched lance on battle and mauler camping ladders on sieges.    woooooo funnnn...............

knockdown = random


random in a pvpgame = bad

If you dont play this game with a 4 directional weapon and manual blocking.....
Why?  its the only fucking point of the game. All other aspects of it are done better elsewhere

Being ranged at all in a game revolving around hand to hand combat is all about griefing.
Do you like griefing?
Shooting people and ruining their shit, denying them a chance to play the game and have fun.

In fact im not sure why its even a part of the game anymore, its just so incredibly annoying and just ruins the experience.
Its not even fun to kill a ranged guy when you finally catch him, cause most cant fight back or even if they can it will be unfair.

Balance the game in the right direction.

Remove HA, its the best solution.

18
General Discussion / Re: Get rid of conquest to dedicated server
« on: February 22, 2018, 09:02:12 am »
<accidental post please delete>

19
Game Balance Discussion / Re: Remove ranged
« on: February 22, 2018, 06:47:33 am »
Add a PD requirement for crossbows. GG you just balanced them.

Yes, please give crossbows Power Draw which amplifies the damage, so I can properly one shot plate wearers.  This sounds like it would definitely make our ranged experience better.  :P

20
Suggestions Corner / Re: Give us back damage display
« on: February 22, 2018, 06:18:51 am »
I feel like game mechanic opaqueness only encourages a wide range of player builds.  While you can change things and ultimately see how effective builds are just by exploring and using them on a server...  It would be a different community if we can whittle down all builds to just 1 per class that are "OBVIOUSLY MOAR 1337 THAN URS" with mathz.

Player diversity is good.

21
Suggestions Corner / Re: Shield Rebalancing
« on: February 22, 2018, 05:41:37 am »
I seem to recall the last time I saw you on the battlefield you shot me in the back of my head even while I was using my shield as a hoplite and when I proceeded to call you a coward you said you were merely taking the opportunity to put down a key player, or whatever it was that you tell yourself so you can sleep at night. :P

Just because experienced ranged know exactly to what extent those huge invisible shield barriers protect shielders, doesn't mean they aren't supposed to exploit that knowledge.  :P  If a shielder isn't pointing their shield at me, I should absolutely be able to hit them.  Anything else is just ridiculous.  Now, with good shield skill, the windows to hit them are tighter than you think, if they are facing exactly 90 degrees away from me, I have to either time the shot with them moving to block an ally, at a different angle, or aim at the back 1/2 of their head or more when they have higher shield skill, since anything else will impact the shield, even though the bolt clearly hit them.  It's just so common that players don't put that many points into shield skill.  This was through personal experience and many talks with various shielders over time.  Any players that only meet the requirements of the shield pretty much fall into the category of barely able to protect themselves, with clean straight on defensive angles.  This is why you see me take so many shots at the very top of player's heads with any sort of elevated angle.  Or even just shoot the top of their head from straight on.  One, most players just don't have the shield skill, where it makes it possible to overcome it.  It strains the shield skill effect against that invisible bubble.  With good shield skill, unless you're aiming at 1/3rd of the body behind the shield, it will be pulled into the shield's invisible dome. 

If they're pointing the shield beyond 90 degrees away from me, then I should definitely be able to just hit any part of the exposed player.  The better shielders, like Manowar, didn't wear much armor in comparison to others.  I mean a mail hauberk...(Dat Q-cumberance, amirite?  Oh god, that joke is ancient...) he depended more on his shield and shield skill.  Not only this, but what tiny fraction of cRPG shielders still care about the mechanic of proper directional blocks with a shield, cause it to get not as destroyed so fast?  I feel like this was way more extreme in the original intent of the M&B creators.  I can hit a shield for a silly long time with a sword before it will break, way longer against proper blocks.  Should this be taken into account in balancing, does the general community even think about this when weighing in if shields are balanced?

Quote
it's mostly the fact that shields are the supposed counter to ranged, and yet carrying any decent shield with you makes you move just about as slowly as they do... only archers can shoot you while running away and you can't do anything but block and chase, with little, if any hope of catching up.

Yeah, I would say it's hard to approach this in an effective, non-heavy handed manner.  On one side, a good game doesn't contain absolute final hard counters, only better-to-very good ways of dealing with a problem.  If you tell someone, well this afk player has a shield, so you just immediately die if you shoot an arrow even remotely close to him...  doesn't sound like fun.  You have a melee oriented player who only thinks melee players should have fun, and non-melee should be happy to keel over dead when they turn to gaze on the ranged scum.  Then you just have two players reconnecting with whatever alt auto-wins against the other player, infinitely.  Might as well just play rock-paper-scissors at that point.  Now, obviously that's not what you meant, but there are the two extreme sides of the coin, and somewhere in between is the illusive happy medium.  I tend to think the game is balanced around team play, so shielders, in my mind, are the anchor that the team plays around.  Do we balance for 1v1, or team based scenarios?  If a shielder isn't pointing their shield at me, I should be able to hit them.  I probably have a lot of feel for the shield bubble from figuring out what kind of angles I could kill anywhere from your basic fake shielder, to Manowar/KevinD/that full plate french canadian with the metal shield?/Matey, to those naked dudes with 13 shield skill(invulnerable at the time).  So considering the current state of the game, I do think shielders should receive a buff, but not an overall wide sweeping buff that would threaten to immediately throw things out of balance.

Quote
currently your shield can block projectiles even if you're simply running with it at your side, or holding an attack, however it backfires almost all the time because oftentimes something blocked by your shield when you're holding an attack isn't likely to hit you anyways, and when it hits your shield you get put into stun for some odd reason, similar to if you blocked a projectile with your shield in a blocking position. Needless to say it can be just as bad as actually getting hit by the projectile if you're in the middle of a fight, take your chance and throw out an attack, only to have it interrupted and canceled mid-swing by an arrow harmlessly hitting your shield.

I think all archers are very familiar with that aggravating feeling of connecting with the shield just moving around, when the enemy is engaged with your teammate(another reason to aim for the head).  I would agree that it shouldn't stun you.

[My Suggestion]
My opinion is that a good change would be adjusting the effective arc of benefit to the invisible bubble from shield skill.  Make lesser shield skill increase the invisible bubble sooner, but don't let extreme unbreakable shield levels back into the game(complete separation of absorption/armor/speed benefit[not sure if possible]), from shield skill.  I remember the times when this was actually being put into place, and I can recall not even being able to hit someone 2 people over from a single shielder in a group melee.  It literally hit the shield of the shielder that was just blocking, two people over!  This was absolutely infuriating, and the only time this should happen is in a full shield wall(which I don't think and hope, ever reached that same level).  This would be a separate change from just dropping the requirements of shields, which honestly has nothing to do with shield effectiveness against ranged and this change may end up hurting more than helping since lower shield skill in general means you're getting hit by even more ranged!  In the end, either your arrow/bolt hits THEM or the SHIELD.  People don't remotely care as much about anything else.  Arrows do next to nothing to a shield, and bolts do a little more than that.  I don't see how getting access to a shield that has more armor and health will change the fact that you're getting hit by ranged, since you would be rewarded for having even less shield skill, which is what really matters if you want to NOT get hit by ranged.  Past a certain point, shield health and armor only matter in melee.

I would say important factors are shield skill, and decent speed of the shield (which is very small compared to the shield skill [talking about invisible bubble here]).  This may have been a part of the update that wasn't given enough love to the extent it needed, when the levels were re-adjusted.  With lower levels all around, all players had to make decisions on what to give up, but this probably needs to get underlined with the current state of our ranged problem.

So maybe the combination of the highly suggested reduction of shield requirements and strengthening/adjusting the arc of the benefit to the invisible barrier from shield skill is what needs to happen.  Because I do not see shielders with the difficulty to hit in the days of old anymore.  Only the back pixels of their helmet were hittable from the side.  That was the extreme version, but it's that choice of adjusting for common skill levels of the community vs. new comers that we're faced with now.

22
Suggestions Corner / Re: Shield Rebalancing
« on: February 21, 2018, 04:48:04 am »
I could probably get behind some shield buff changes.  More shielders always shifted the views on what ranged means for the game.  I would be very careful with these changes though, or else you'll see a bunch of crossbow/everyone users with weightless shields on their back, because... why not?  I don't feel like shields are "useless".  Jona, are you sure you're not just a tiny bit bias'd with your obvious Avatar?  =P  I seem to remember you busting shields in 2 swings, if that...  Maybe it's, "if you have an axe it seems really bad"?

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


I always found it funny when the last ones alive were a non-shielder vs. multiple ranged characters, and the melee is basically going...  The arrows are incoming, and there's 10 pieces of wood at my feet to protect me... But it's too hard... I don't know what a shield is or how to use it...

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


Having a shield on your back as a melee shielder, skillfully finishing the last enemy melee while the shield on your back blocks an incoming arrow (shot from a cross eyed ranged mebbe, amirite?) does sound pretty cool.

23
Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord / Re: 2/29/20
« on: February 21, 2018, 12:44:15 am »
December 2010.

I mean... deep down, we all knew this...

24
Announcements / Re: Santa's Presents
« on: February 21, 2018, 12:18:10 am »
What date range does this apply to?  I'm not sure if this was applied to my account.  I believe I've logged on here and there throughout 2017.  May be wrong.

25
Announcements / Re: 0.5.2.4: Auto-Balance, and other Balancings
« on: February 20, 2018, 10:44:45 pm »
wtf, NA guys have some memory problems or what?

2 years ago you couldnt kill peasant with arbalest to the body, now you can 1 hit people with 35 armor, its not nerfed  compared to this. I mention it like 10th time but yea, NA masterrace, "lets kill the mod" balancer team did they job well :F

Last night I couldn't 1 shot any archers in cloth or robes, takes 2 shots with an Arb or Heavy(I have a MW Crossbow, Heavy, and Arb).  They utterly black bar me with 2 arrow shots, more than 1 shot me with a headshot, and I wear *way* more armor then they do.  So I'm not sure what you're talking about, unless there is some vast differences between the server builds NA has and EU has, which I doubt.

26
Announcements / Re: 0.5.2.4: Auto-Balance, and other Balancings
« on: February 20, 2018, 09:38:55 pm »
Pretty shocked at this thread to be honest.  As one of the oldest crossbow players in NA, in my opinion, crossbows are definitely nerfed.  The already poor accuracy is worse, and the crossbows do less damage than before.  Archery is dead accurate in comparison, it doesn't even come close.  It has always been like this, I've compared accuracy many times with some of the top archers, even with Bagge, for EU reference.   And it's pathetic for the crossbow honestly, when you compare shot per shot placement(groupings).  But now it's even worse(I thought it was bad back then).  Overall, this is probably not a bad thing, rather a good thing, maybe it’s a little excessive with the new changes in my opinion.  But a lot of these points are not taken into account by the community.  Another trade off would be, of course, that the crossbow can absolutely choose when to discharge their weapon.  There is quite a lot to take into account.  That’s what the balancing team has to do.

For you people who think (currently) crossbows are anti archer: granted this indeed used to be the case, but is not in the current state of the game.  Yes, if I can headshot an archer without being noticed(this is not a class *thing*, anyone can be “stealth”), I will.  Since the archer clearly out classes me in overall damage output(which isn't a bad thing, since they are a more dedicated range class), I should take him out earlier rather than later.  I'm also surprised that nobody is mentioning the insane damage bows are currently doing.  A bow would NEVER approach the damage it's currently doing to me in the past.  Bows effectively do the same damage as crossbows in terms of shots to kill with the current *possible builds* that are commonly in use now.  And they shoot way faster.  However, this is not a problem?  I’m not sure.  I don't disagree with the changes, but the reaction from the general population is surprising.  Of course, I am holding out on the fact that this may be completely the fault of the armor soak being up in the air right now.  We just have to see.

Balancing should be looked at from all sides of cRPG, from every classes perspective, and finally how they all interact with each other.  The most common reaction posts I see in general are "what this means to me", instead of "what this means for everyone".  I see "you buffed crossbows" when I *personally* would MUCH rather go back to "the way it was", since crossbows were much stronger before...  The mix of character level changes, damage mitigation, stat changes, and speed mechanics have nerfed crossbows quite a bit.  But the community perceives this as a buff...  I for one would be all for reverting all these changes if the community *perceives* it as a buff.....

@DaveUKR, saying someone "forced" you to insult them is pretty extreme...  That’s like saying someone “forced” you to hit them.  While I can see your points, I'm not sure if you necessarily see where Nightingale was going with this.  You should have just pointed out what the, in your opinion, flaws were, what you think should happen, why, what you think could possibly be the reasoning for the changes, and why they may or may not be helpful to the game balance.  And by the way, Nightingale has extensive history as a crossbow player as well.  So even though we may not agree with the changes, it’s not like they were coming from absolutely nowhere.

/tangent:  Why can't we just have an actual constructive conversation over balancing and come to a conclusion as a non-toxic community?  I, for one, have always been embarrassed at just how toxic the cRPG community is(no reference at all to DaveUKR, whom I’ve actually always viewed as a person that generally knows what he’s talking about).  We have a blatant pool of the worst offenders who will never be permanently banned for whatever reason, and they themselves advertise this.  Hopefully when Bannerlord comes out we can aim for a better experience, since we'll have the population to not make all these exceptions.

27

how 2 block couched lance (after its fixed)?

Baby steps.

28
Honestly I think all of this is moot.  If you're making suggestions to new players on how to survive vs. cav... I think the number one thing you can tell them is get a down block ready.  It's hard for them to time attacks in ground combat and now you want them to attack a high speed moving horse.  With couch being broken, new players who don't know: just need to know that a lancer cav can only thrust.  So they just need to block down.  The same thing applies if it's a non-lancer, you just need to block their telegraphed attack that's being held up.  All while just moving away from the direction their going or juke them, so they cant knock you down just before their attack hits(therefore bypassing your block).  Many eons ago when I was new, I found cav so frustrating, and then I realized that all you have to do is block their attack.  When you become more of an advanced player, and can see some of the little delays and counter measures people are doing to counter each other, then you should be comfortable with attacking cav.  Eventually you'll be like veterans that cav will avoid like the plague until they kill off everyone else, unless your back is turned of course.

Just block.
Get the basics down, and watch how others deal with cav, and start to learn.  While staying alive.

29
Beginner's Help and Guides / Re: Which Xbow? WPF?
« on: June 22, 2017, 12:58:33 am »
I pretty much agree with Nightingale.  A lot of people don't understand that the accuracy goes up with the same wpf as you move to lower and lower crossbows.  It's kind of like the fluctuation with normal bows, when you add powerstrike, you need more wpf to have the same accuracy you did before you added the powerstrike.  It's like controlling raw power, the more power, the more wpf you need to control it.  So if you have mediocre wpf, you would be better off with a lower tier crossbow.  My thoughts on numbers are slightly different than Nightingale's, but Nightingale knows more about the hard numbers in the game.  I wouldn't listen to anyone else's post if I were you.

Summary: Higher tier crossbow = more wpf required for more accuracy/tighter crosshairs.  I own a Masterwork Crossbow, Masterwork Heavy Crossbow, and Masterwork Arbalest.  I also make use of them for different situations.

Crossbow: Better for a lower pop server, or if your team is getting destroyed.  You are able to get more shots off before being forced into melee.
Heavy Crossbow: Your team knows what a front line is and is actively delaying the enemy team,  giving you the time to destroy them with your heavier hitting crossbow.
Arbalest: Bring truckloads of tears and salt to anyone or anything you hit with your shot.  Usually mounted to the top of a Battleship.  Can also watch episodes of your favorite TV series between reloads.  Sometimes you only get to shoot it twice in a round.  Critical for the other team to counter you.

Crossbowmen are heavily dependent on their team to be effective ranged.  Be prepared to be effective in melee, that's why you can be...

Crossbows used to have a chance to penetrate shields...  pretty op.  I still think they should make crossbows have the 'Bonus against shield' flag...

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 19