I know this poll is limited, it's just intended to give us a general idea.
To give you a helping hand in answering the topics, ask yourself this question:
buff <item class> - would I like the fact that every item in that class would get it's stats increased by 5%.
nerf <item class> - would I like the fact that every item in that class would get it's stats decreased by 5%.
that should give you a good idea about what to tick and what not.
May I say that it is likely the average player will vote to buff their most used playstyle and nerf their natural counter. I don't see how this will give you any accurate data, but welcome the chance to offer honest feedback nonetheless.
May I say that it is likely the average player will vote to buff their most used playstyle and nerf their natural counter. I don't see how this will give you any accurate data, but welcome the chance to offer honest feedback nonetheless.
I think only polearms should be nerfed a little, someone can stun (no blunt weapon but, for example, the hafted blade) you and continue spamming without possibility to block it.
Other classes are balanced i think
Can ONLY select up to 18, damn, jk. But would be interesting to know results at the end. Most things are balanced right now, except horses speed/maneuverability stilll pretty high. Once the January patch nerfed levels and made 3 agility per riding it wasn't immediately an issue because of expensive upkeep, but with upkeep lowered in one of the hotfixes and people accumulating gold for months so cavalry definitely becoming an unbalancing factor. pre-January you could dodge a lance with good enough athletics, but most people have far less athletics now with level cap so couching lances and lollancings are really easy kills. Would not be surprised if cav kills have been steadily rising for past 2 months as a percentage of all kills. They also have been getting fewer and fewer ranged counters so the dancing just out of range and then swooping in with high speed and maneuvarability and almost always a longer weapon except against bamboo spear, long spear, and pike has become quite common.
Can ONLY select up to 18, damn, jk. But would be interesting to know results at the end. Most things are balanced right now, except horses speed/maneuverability stilll pretty high. Once the January patch nerfed levels and made 3 agility per riding it wasn't immediately an issue because of expensive upkeep, but with upkeep lowered in one of the hotfixes and people accumulating gold for months so cavalry definitely becoming an unbalancing factor. pre-January you could dodge a lance with good enough athletics, but most people have far less athletics now with level cap so couching lances and lollancings are really easy kills. Would not be surprised if cav kills have been steadily rising for past 2 months as a percentage of all kills. They also have been getting fewer and fewer ranged counters so the dancing just out of range and then swooping in with high speed and maneuvarability and almost always a longer weapon except against bamboo spear, long spear, and pike has become quite common.
i have nothing to do with you but every post i ever happen to stumble across by you is QQ and whine about cav...give it a rest, the key is in the title of the game, not the mod
Can ONLY select up to 18, damn, jk. But would be interesting to know results at the end. Most things are balanced right now, except horses speed/maneuverability stilll pretty high. Once the January patch nerfed levels and made 3 agility per riding it wasn't immediately an issue because of expensive upkeep, but with upkeep lowered in one of the hotfixes and people accumulating gold for months so cavalry definitely becoming an unbalancing factor. pre-January you could dodge a lance with good enough athletics, but most people have far less athletics now with level cap so couching lances and lollancings are really easy kills. Would not be surprised if cav kills have been steadily rising for past 2 months as a percentage of all kills. They also have been getting fewer and fewer ranged counters so the dancing just out of range and then swooping in with high speed and maneuvarability and almost always a longer weapon except against bamboo spear, long spear, and pike has become quite common.
Cavalry needs to be balanced somehow, especially lancing. Their ability to get easy kills is sickening. Watching a few lancers pick off your WHOLE team is very demoralizing. Perhaps they shouldn't be able to one shot people with ease.
Also, the speed at some builds swing their weapons makes it nearly impossible to counter sometimes.
I started playing last month and cRPG is still a great mod overall. Keep up the good work, chadz.
I am so fcking tired of the everlasting anticav whine it almost makes me wanna puke. The whine won't ever stop until cavalry is nerfed to the ground, pretty sad. Either remove cav from the game or just keep it the way it is atm with some slight changes to price/upkeep.
Other than that , i voted "buff armors". It doesn't affect any specific class and at the same times affects all classes, with the increased number of heirloomed weapons in the game and the growing population of STR builds i think it will make the game abit more interesting and fights abit more prolonged, imho.
I am so fcking tired of the everlasting anticav whine it almost makes me wanna puke. The whine won't ever stop until cavalry is nerfed to the ground, pretty sad. Either remove cav from the game or just keep it the way it is atm with some slight changes to price/upkeep.
Other than that , i voted "buff armors". It doesn't affect any specific class and at the same times affects all classes, with the increased number of heirloomed weapons in the game and the growing population of STR builds i think it will make the game abit more interesting and fights abit more prolonged, imho.
bla, bla, bla And cav archers are going to need an enemy. They will soon dominate the field I believe, bla, bla, bla
sounds like cav is how it should be... Sounds realistic not to mention you could always brind a fucking PIKE!!! or maybe watch your back? huh? huh? what ya think?
can you pls nerf HA, in the way of penalty using bows on horse, like speed of reloding? or make them play only in 1st view style
I selected few choices that deserve nerf: horses, 2h, polearms, bow.
I think that best 1h weapons need to be slightly nerfed too (elite scimitar, broad battle axe or however it's called nowadays).
I think that most maneuverable horses need their maneuver reduced by few points (3-4) and generally horses dominate atm.
I think that damage across the board for 2h and Polearms need to be reduced across the board.
I think that bow damage need to be reduced slightly.
Result of the vote; it is easy to predict.
Most people play with 1h +2 h + pole + xbow, naturally wish to nerfs the archers / HA / Cavs / throws.
The dictatorship of the majority,ekhm,... this is democracy ...
Nerf 2h more? lolol. Man they alrdy suck atm. why do you think so many left it ? even im wondering about it :PThey don't suck. Many left because they are slightly less obvious op weapons, and because polearms are new black. Notice that i voted for both nerfing 2h and polearms, so i'm not biased (and their relative power level will stay the same when fighting each other).
i have nothing to do with you but every post i ever happen to stumble across by you is QQ and whine about cav...give it a rest, the key is in the title of the game, not the mod
I should have given the throwers some love and said buff throwing, but I forgot and just said leave everything as is. Also should 1h get a spped boost? I heard that and I mean, the 1h gets really speedy between 99-100, a noticeable speed
i have nothing to do with you but every post i ever happen to stumble across by you is QQ and whine about cav...give it a rest, the key is in the title of the game, not the modI think i remember chadz saying that this mod was intended as an infantry mod early on. So it actually has nothing to do with the name of the game, in fact, that is the dumbest of all the arguments for cavalry.
- throwing got nerfed into oblivion, the only thing what is usable at all are the war darts in the opinion of lots of throwers i have spoken to.A lot of people actually missed this, but wardarts were reduced to 4 per stack in the most recent patch. :lol:
things i like to see to be a little different
- Xbows should need skill points to use like any other ranged weapon.
- if i need 2 slots for a shield, it has to be really good, in terms of huscarl, it got nerfed 2 times in last 2 patches, less coverage, less hp, less toughness, increase the coverage and either hp or toughness again.
- throwing got nerfed into oblivion, the only thing what is usable at all are the war darts in the opinion of lots of throwers i have spoken to. The last nerf that Javalins need 2 slots after reducing their ammo and damage was their death sentence, same with Jarrids, Lances are even worse. I played thrower in 4 generations on my alt and it needs a lot of more skill to get close to enemies and avoid them then the other ranged classes. You normaly don't hit with most of your throws if so you are more lucky then skilled. Give more armor to lances and make it 7 PT to use them again. 3 per 2 slots, I don't think a hybrid 2h/thrower with lances with only 3 laces would be OP, if so reduce the damage not the ammo.
- There should be a 1slot Polearm(Spear) witch is between 150-170 and sheatable. That would make a horse nerf obsolet in my eyes. If you do a horse nerf instead don't go for their speed but for their aiming.
- Reduce the time you stay on ground after a horse bump and after a knockdown
- the 3 mauls there are should increase in their abilities like, the smallest ahs knockdown, the iron small one should have crushthrough and the large iron maul then can have crushthrough and knockdown.
To give you a helping hand in answering the topics, ask yourself this question:Had to vote to leave everything as is. There are minor balances I think every class(except for sword and board) needs, but nothing like a 5% stat increase across the board for that classes items. Throwing would be the closest thing to needing a 5% increase across the board, if I had to choose one thing. After that, it'd probably be "revert the 2h thrust animation". Neither of which really qualify as buffing the entirety of the class.
buff <item class> - would I like the fact that every item in that class would get it's stats increased by 5%.
nerf <item class> - would I like the fact that every item in that class would get it's stats decreased by 5%.
They don't suck. Many left because they are slightly less obvious op weapons, and because polearms are new black. Notice that i voted for both nerfing 2h and polearms, so i'm not biased (and their relative power level will stay the same when fighting each other).
I think it's fine overall. A few tweaks is needed though, in my oppinion.
- Two-Hand needs a new thrust animation.
It has a stuttering, laggy look.
Too slow.
Late/weird hit registration.
Glancing blows, alot of them.(Just what it feels like, due to various things.)
180+ degree spinthrusts are back.
And most importantly, the thrust stun needs to be gone. Whenever I thrust, a good opponent will know that he can just slash me due to me being stunned. This is game breaking and the single most frustration for all two-handers.
To fix two-handed you need to...
- Fix the current thrust by speeding it up to atleast be on par with the polearm animation and more importantly, fix the thrust stun and get it removed.
- Fix late hit registration.
- Buff damage slightly(Tiny, 1-3 points) yet still be inferior to general polearm damage dealing.
- Speed up the swords by a couple of points to slightly above general polearm speed.
Compared to polearms, two-handed swords and Great Swords in particular is inferior in every way.
Other things on my mind...
Plated Charger needs a buff... horses in general need a buff.
Throwing needs some more projectiles in their stacks(I still hate you:P).
So nearly all 2h players is just noobs who wanted a op weapon ? lol dude rly ? And their relative power level with stay the same? .... erm 2h kinda fails, polearms is op atm.
The thing I am most annoyed with since the last patch is the slot system. I makes no sense that an archer or xbow can not be any kind of hybrid any more (unless he uses a useless bow and has one quiver of arrows, making him a 2h/pole with a sidearm bow, not an archer - a useful archer has to spend 4 slots on bow and 2 quivers of arrows), while overpowered 2H monsters can still have a tiny little bec or pike or shield/1h as secondary weapon....
Besides that most stuff is quite well balanced now, I'd say (and I say that not only as an archer, but playing polearm, shielder/thrower, etc. alts as well).
One more thing: while I know that most users prefer the timelapse jumpslash hectical unrealistic BF2 type of battle - the speed of many weapons in this game is slightly outerworldly, in many cases you do not even see any animation any more, you just fall dead while the guy with that tiny poleaxe or bec seemingly did not even move...
So I voted for a (moderate) nerf of 2H and poles.
Force them to be "pure" just as us ranged folks (or give us back the possiblity to have a decent weapon, we are crippled enough by having to spend each and every single WPF on archery... ) and make them a little slower, esp. the big and heavy ones - no one in real life swings an bec, a long mace or a poleaxe faster than the eye can see...
Yes, they are players who want to have big edge in melee combat, and think they have dueling weapon (while using great swords, formation weapon that is meant to support other players). If you want dueling weapon, there is still Longsword for you, awesome weapon btw.
Phyrex is good example of it, he want no-glance whirlwind attacks and lolstabs back. Oh, wow, he even want superfast greatswords. WOW. :shock:
The thing I am most annoyed with since the last patch is the slot system. I makes no sense that an archer or xbow can not be any kind of hybrid any more (unless he uses a useless bow and has one quiver of arrows, making him a 2h/pole with a sidearm bow, not an archer - a useful archer has to spend 4 slots on bow and 2 quivers of arrows), while overpowered 2H monsters can still have a tiny little bec or pike or shield/1h as secondary weapon....
Besides that most stuff is quite well balanced now, I'd say (and I say that not only as an archer, but playing polearm, shielder/thrower, etc. alts as well).
One more thing: while I know that most users prefer the timelapse jumpslash hectical unrealistic BF2 type of battle - the speed of many weapons in this game is slightly outerworldly, in many cases you do not even see any animation any more, you just fall dead while the guy with that tiny poleaxe or bec seemingly did not even move...
So I voted for a (moderate) nerf of 2H and poles.
Force them to be "pure" just as us ranged folks (or give us back the possiblity to have a decent weapon, we are crippled enough by having to spend each and every single WPF on archery... ) and make them a little slower, esp. the big and heavy ones - no one in real life swings a bec, a long mace, big sword or a poleaxe faster than the eye can see...
1hs can do the exact same thing...especially without a shield :)
that is right, but at least it is a little less absurd than swinging some hugish monster like poleaxe or flam in a way that we now see in this game - at least the "self stun" between swings is noticeably higher with big heavy 2H/polearm weapons, as any martial arts practitioner (or wood cutter) can tell.
Every playerer picked thier build thinking it would give them an advantage in SOME aspect of combat, otherwise why would they bother? Just count how many throwers you see these days. I do agree that the greatswords are a tad op in their current form though.
Erm.... woot?. Greatswords are op ? have you seen nerfs ? have you seen stab dmg ? have you seen the stab stun (wtf). Do you play a 2h?
And you dont even think the polearms are op ? what about their sick speed/reach and stun?
Dont put polearms and 2h in the same group dude.
Erm.... woot?. Greatswords are op ? have you seen nerfs ? have you seen stab dmg ? have you seen the stab stun (wtf). Do you play a 2h?
And you dont even think the polearms are op ? what about their sick speed/reach and stun?
Can ONLY select up to 18, damn, jk. But would be interesting to know results at the end. Most things are balanced right now, except horses speed/maneuverability stilll pretty high. Once the January patch nerfed levels and made 3 agility per riding it wasn't immediately an issue because of expensive upkeep, but with upkeep lowered in one of the hotfixes and people accumulating gold for months so cavalry definitely becoming an unbalancing factor. pre-January you could dodge a lance with good enough athletics, but most people have far less athletics now with level cap so couching lances and lollancings are really easy kills. Would not be surprised if cav kills have been steadily rising for past 2 months as a percentage of all kills. They also have been getting fewer and fewer ranged counters so the dancing just out of range and then swooping in with high speed and maneuvarability and almost always a longer weapon except against bamboo spear, long spear, and pike has become quite common.
Sry dude, but this is pissing me of. Wanna nerf a alrdy nerfed 2h. Which even have some bugs with animatons. I dont see why, you can still see it as op.
Trying to save the 2h, just a little bit. Wanting to nerf alrdy nerfed shitty weapons... is just... meh.
Btw if you wanna put speed down on pole/2h, you rly gotta put down speed on 1h too. They are just freaking fast. Even with a big heavy shield, and they just have to right-click to block.
No matter what I try but I can never outspam you, 1h is supposed to be fast and light.
In most 1v1s you die as shielder since you bounce SO much even on some stupid medium armor, the only good hit my long espada has is a thrust trough the head because swings besides a good placed thrust or overhead are the only hits that go trough here.
also, this vote is secret, please do not try to influence other people.
Uh, if you see a lancer soon enough to try to dodge, why don't you just block down?
After reading some posts from other people, I demand a "buff xp" poll option!
LOL, I do, all the time, but thats like saying if a 2hander is swinging at you, hold up a shield, doesn't make a class somehow not OP just by blocking them
May I say that it is likely the average player will vote to buff their most used playstyle and nerf their natural counter.
I voted, but also here is something else; Buff AGI builds.
Right now it would appear that high STR builds actually swing and attack faster then their AGI counterparts, all the while wearing their heavy stuff. Which is down right weird, especially when I, personally, am pushing 180 WPF with a katana while wearing about 10 weight in equipment, total.
Additionally, I recommend buffing Athletics, or at least the acceleration. Mount and blade has a strange physics engine, so if you even glance at something that isn't flat you lose a lot of speed, everyone functionally running at the same speed over such terrain as a result. It's silly.
Additionally, having AGI be the ones who swing fast would be nice; Consider STR to be ye olde damage dealers and tanks while AGI the speedy rogues. AGI builds are largely confined to light armor to keep their bonuses going and, additionally, have shit health. (STR and IF give you health, which... AGI builds do not have.) Throwing them a slashyslashy bone would be nice.
LOL, I do, all the time, but thats like saying if a 2hander is swinging at you, hold up a shield, doesn't make a class somehow not OP just by blocking them (and by the way other than crushthrough weapons, lancers have the only UNBLOCKABLE attack - couched lance). In actual combat, just go watch NA 100 server with 30-40% of the server going cavalry. You can downblock the first cav, he tramples you, seccond cav following easily lances you. Or the more common scenario, you downblock or use a pike all the way to an actual melee fight and as soon as you engage anyone they can turn their horse on a dime (arabian) or charge halfwaya cross the field in a few seconds (courser) and either couch you or lollance you while you are meleeing.
Most cavalry kills are not people being unaware but cavalry having much higher speed and maneuverability and a much longer weapon than most allowing them to take advantage and easily kill anyone engaged in melee. When you are on a horse just skirt the edges of the fight see someone actually try to melee anyone and you can get there within 2 seconds and lance them in the back, its incredibly easy way to rack up 20, sometimes 30 kills on a map with minimal risk. The supposed counter of get a pike also doesn't work in that scenario as you cant melee very well if you are using a pike or if you are meleeing or trying to attack a different cavalry person, the same thing happens to you.
The main reason this is possible is because of the huge bonus the riding skill gives to speed and maneuverability, which wasn't horirble as long as there were few cav on the battlefield (just like when there were few throwers on field before january), but as people have acquired more gold, upkeep is more manageable for many using a horse and the imbalance becomes readily noticeable as they proliferate. It was actually much easier to dodge a lance before January even though horses lost 2 speed because the riding skill requirement of 6 agility kept riding skill lower, but now with the average riding skill being half again as high as it used to be it actually made horses faster and more maneuverable with 2 less speed stats. Most lances outrange all but the longest polearms (think pikeman but with much greater mobility and a much larger speed bonus), so unless they are really average or bad they will hit you before you strike their horse and downblocking doesn't make them go away they just spin a 180 and hit you when you are meleeing or facing a different horseman.
The best evidence is just watch most fights nowadays and the practical reality of any map with even remotely flat terrain, inevitably cav completely dominate the battlefield every round. Don't look at your own self as a horseman but how it actually plays out ina balancing or unbalancing role in large group fights with multiple cavalry. Inevitably, individual cav don't think speed/maneuvarbility need to be reduced, but thats never the whole picture from agame balancing perspective.
Well said!
Well said for someone who wants to lay waste to all before him. Why must you think of not the single cavalryman, but the cavalry as a whole?
Why do you think of yourself as the lone warrior? If infantry were in a group, they would be much safer from cavalry.
If a two-hander is swinging at you, hold up your shield, and let your teammate bash in his skull! It does not matter if you get the kill, only that you win, for the multiplier.
If an archer is shooting at you, and you have no shield, hide behind someone who does! Or ask a horseman to assist you while you distract the archer.
Cavalry can only bump into one or two people before being stopped, even without a pike.
When 10 archers get together, and focus their fire, Cavalry gets decimated. 10 two handers will tear through almost any defense. 10 crossbowmen will reduce armored men to scrap. 10 spearmen will keep anyone at bay, 10 1h swordsmen will swarm any foe.
Why must you think of only cavalry when they act as a group? Cavalry act together because you learn very early on, that a lone cav at the start of the battle is mincemeat. It is time for everyone else to learn this lesson, and act together if they want to win a battle.
You talk about cav ignoring the full picture, but it is Kesh who ignores it, and would be happy to see cavalry gone from the game, or limited to only 3 per team.
Cavalry is heavily dependent upon the map terrain and composition of the enemy force. In addition, a cavalryman is also heavily dependent upon his horse, a great expense. Cav is forced to spend less on armor and secondary weapons as he must spend all of it on his horse, maybe a shield, and lance, if he equips himself fully, he will quickly run out of money. If the horseman loses his horse he is usually swarmed and beaten to death, and if not, he may find himself inadequately equipped to fight on foot for someone at his level.
As cavalry becomes more popular, both teams will have similar numbers of cavalry, thus balancing it out. Having many of one type working together on a team will always defeat an opposing team without the correct counter or teamwork. This is also why many people are upset with the "banner balance" mechanic.
You might say "You can't balance this game depending upon people to work together!" but that is stupid, what about Strategus? Are there going to be two sets of rules for balance?
Well said for someone who wants to lay waste to all before him. Why must you think of not the single cavalryman, but the cavalry as a whole?
Why do you think of yourself as the lone warrior? If infantry were in a group, they would be much safer from cavalry.
If a two-hander is swinging at you, hold up your shield, and let your teammate bash in his skull! It does not matter if you get the kill, only that you win, for the multiplier.
If an archer is shooting at you, and you have no shield, hide behind someone who does! Or ask a horseman to assist you while you distract the archer.
Cavalry can only bump into one or two people before being stopped, even without a pike.
When 10 archers get together, and focus their fire, Cavalry gets decimated. 10 two handers will tear through almost any defense. 10 crossbowmen will reduce armored men to scrap. 10 spearmen will keep anyone at bay, 10 1h swordsmen will swarm any foe.
Why must you think of only cavalry when they act as a group? Cavalry act together because you learn very early on, that a lone cav at the start of the battle is mincemeat. It is time for everyone else to learn this lesson, and act together if they want to win a battle.
You talk about cav ignoring the full picture, but it is Kesh who ignores it, and would be happy to see cavalry gone from the game, or limited to only 3 per team.
Cavalry is heavily dependent upon the map terrain and composition of the enemy force. In addition, a cavalryman is also heavily dependent upon his horse, a great expense. Cav is forced to spend less on armor and secondary weapons as he must spend all of it on his horse, maybe a shield, and lance, if he equips himself fully, he will quickly run out of money. If the horseman loses his horse he is usually swarmed and beaten to death, and if not, he may find himself inadequately equipped to fight on foot for someone at his level.
As cavalry becomes more popular, both teams will have similar numbers of cavalry, thus balancing it out. Having many of one type working together on a team will always defeat an opposing team without the correct counter or teamwork. This is also why many people are upset with the "banner balance" mechanic.
You might say "You can't balance this game depending upon people to work together!" but that is stupid, what about Strategus? Are there going to be two sets of rules for balance?
+1(click to show/hide)
+1, but for slightly different reason, as the armor got buffed and the damaged of weapons overall got nerved, all this seems to speak to go for strength builds, as with additional PS they do on a regular base less glancing and more damage and in this sense aren't that much effected from the changes.(click to show/hide)
+1
+1, but for slightly different reason, as the armor got buffed and the damaged of weapons overall got nerved, all this seems to speak to go for strength builds, as with additional PS they do on a regular base less glancing and more damage and in this sense aren't that much effected from the changes.
I voted, but also here is something else; Buff AGI builds.
Right now it would appear that high STR builds actually swing and attack faster then their AGI counterparts, all the while wearing their heavy stuff. Which is down right weird, especially when I, personally, am pushing 180 WPF with a katana while wearing about 10 weight in equipment, total.
Additionally, I recommend buffing Athletics, or at least the acceleration. Mount and blade has a strange physics engine, so if you even glance at something that isn't flat you lose a lot of speed, everyone functionally running at the same speed over such terrain as a result. It's silly.
Additionally, having AGI be the ones who swing fast would be nice; Consider STR to be ye olde damage dealers and tanks while AGI the speedy rogues. AGI builds are largely confined to light armor to keep their bonuses going and, additionally, have shit health. (STR and IF give you health, which... AGI builds do not have.) Throwing them a slashyslashy bone would be nice.
Then, high agi builds should glance much MORE than str builds, heavy armor will be actually useful, I like that idea.. atm it's pretty lame that the small 1 handers are cutting trough my 50 armor without any problem, and poles+2hs are glancing more often on me than 1 handers lol..they do atm i guess, but for sure only a developer can say who knows the exact calculations and i dont have a beef with that, but in return give the agi whores a buff on agi so they can compensate that disadvantage with either movement or weapon speed.
Then, high agi builds should glance much MORE than str builds, heavy armor will be actually useful, I like that idea.. atm it's pretty lame that the small 1 handers are cutting trough my 50 armor without any problem, and poles+2hs are glancing more often on me than 1 handers lol..+1
May I say that it is likely the average player will vote to buff their most used playstyle and nerf their natural counter. I don't see how this will give you any accurate data, but welcome the chance to offer honest feedback nonetheless.
As for throwing, I dont mind what you do these days, just leave stones alone :mrgreen:.
I didn't do this. I didn't vote to nerf anything at all, actually. I voted to buff the following, which I feel were overnerfed in various ways: Two Handers, Throwing, Crossbows, and Shields.
Extended explanations of each to follow:
Two Handers - Essentially, the role they are meant to fill is that of shock troops, meant to do great damage at long melee range. With the recent nerf to 2h swords thrust damage, I don't think they fill that role well. I did some quick comparing of stats between 1h and 2h, and currently 1h sword thrusts do more damage than a larger, 2 handed weapons thrust. The BEST thrusting weapons from both the 1h and 2h categories are, respectively, the Espada Eslavona, and the German greatsword. If each are heirloomed 3x, the espada does 32 pierce, while the german greatsword does only 27. This is a fairly significant difference in thrust damage, considering that the role of the two hander is to do more damage with longer reach than 1 handers, giving up the defensive benefit of a shield. Additionally, many of the specialty weapons that two-handers had have been nerfed and/or reclassed into something different. Pretty much all of the crush-through weapons have lost crush-through, with the exception of the very slow hammers, which have also been nerfed in weight. The only crush-through weapons left don't crush through often, and are not really good weapon options at the moment due to slow speeds, 2 slots, high weight(slows you down), unbalanced, and unreliable crushthrough. Some weapons, such as the bar mace, long iron mace, etc, have completely lost crushthrough, when a better option, in my opinion, would have been to simply lower their weight. Additionally, many of these weapons base damage has been nerfed on top of their losing a core component of their utility. All of this while maintaining the "unbalanced" flag makes these weapons a sucker's choice, imo.
Throwing was nerfed into uselessness. None of the throwing weapons that do decent damage are feasible to use without being a dedicated thrower. Even the ones that DO have "decent damage" don't kill people who aren't already hurt. A dedicated thrower doesn't get enough ammo to make any significant impact on a battle. Since this last patch, on a server with 100 people, I might see 2 throwers, and they don't do well. Even as a sidearm, it's not really very good, using the smaller throwing weapons. For instance, having power throw 2 and using snowflakes or war darts, the accuracy is still utter crap with 130 wpf in throwing, and when you DO hit, it doesn't really hurt much. There is absolutely no reason outside of style, at this point, to take any ranged weapon other than archery, which is currently in a good place, I think.
Most crossbows are actually in a fairly good place damage-wise, but I don't think the heavy xbow should take 2 slots. I'm on the fence as far as the arbalest goes. Having had a masterwork arbalest and 2x heirloomed bolts prior to the heirloom reset, I can comfortably say that the arbalest doesn't one-shot people with any regularity at the moment. It is also painfully slow to reload even with 155 wpf in xbows. Since that is the case, and you will likely have to shoot someone twice, or finish them off in melee, it makes little sense to use an arbalest or heavy xbow currently. You will get the same 2-shot result with a normal or light xbow most of the time, and be able to carry a 1h+shield, or a 2 slot weapon for melee. My suggested changes would be to make the heavy xbow take up 1 slot, keeping it's damage as it is now, and buff the damage of the sniper xbow to make it more likely to one-shot if you are going to keep the 10 second reload and 2 slot(3 with ammo) requirement. This solution makes heavy xbow useful still as a sidearm, and allows the "arbalest" to be a valid option for dedicated xbowmen.
Shields were recently nerfed to get less HP from heirlooms. Personally, I think this nerf was unnecessary and only caused by the overnerfing of the 2 handers anti-shield toolbox. If 2 handers are fixed, and damage of 2 handers balanced against 1 handers(of which 2 handers should have higher damage across the board than 1h) I believe this nerf could be reverted without shields being "OP". A shield is supposed to be the primary advantage of being a 1h user. As long as there are a good number of anti-shield options available, and 1 handers do notably less damage than 2h or polearms(no shield), then it is not a problem to allow some shields to be fairly resiliant, and resistant to breakage.
So anyhow, thats my 45 cents. If you managed to read my opinion on all of it, I thank you. I know I am a bit long-winded.
those are very good points. as a 2handerm to use thrust effectively doing some damage (only 24 pierce on my claymore), i need to use it when running against an opponent that runs toward me, achieving a good speed bonus.
poleaxes thrust damage, is what two handed pierce swords should do. greatsword and german greatsword should match the elegant and german poleaxes in terms of thrust in my opinion.
with all these damage nerfs, we need to aim for the head. and is easier for a 1handed to aim for the head with a left swing while a twohander need to raise the camera in the correct place to strike the head.
...So you want matching thrust damage on top of a superior animation (speed and reach)?
...So you want matching thrust damage on top of a superior animation (speed and reach)?on an item that requires 2 slots, and 2 hands, ergo no shield? Sounds fair to me.
1 choice for me: buff speed of 1hers. ^^
1h should not get more speed, they are freaking fast, even with 1 wpf. How can you seorusly say they need a buff?
And for god sake, stop putting 2h and polearm in the same group. They arent the same, at all!. Polearms is kinda op atm. But 2h swords suffered alot because of recent patch nerfs, polearm didnt.
exactly. and should be the other way around as polearms gives you:
- side swings with better reach
Superior speed and reach? not rly, seen polearms speed and lenght? Tested against a polearm btw, with my danish greatsword. It had more range with swings, even when i did stab.
This is flat out wrong.
2h
Overhead = +15
Left-to-right = +17
Right-to-left = +13
Thrust =+80Not +80 anymore, but still incredibly long.
2h Polearms
Overhead = -15
Left-to-right = -7
Right-to-left = -2
Thrust = +19
From: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,118906.msg2872758.html#msg2872758
Yes. I use a 141 reach poleaxe, and I get outranged by standard 120 range 2H thrusts. "Tested against a polearm" is vague and does little to support your argument. Were you testing against a glaive, with 160 reach? Of course you shouldn't outrange that. Although you would probably get the first hit in with a thrust anyway, in real combat.
Totally unrelated, make the wakizashi 0 slots, maybe cost a little more, I want to be able to wear my 3 swords again. :C I miss it.
& maybe 0 slot wakizashi would be a choice over 1 slot 2h the langes messer.
I know this poll is limited, it's just intended to give us a general idea.
To give you a helping hand in answering the topics, ask yourself this question:
buff <item class> - would I like the fact that every item in that class would get it's stats increased by 5%.
nerf <item class> - would I like the fact that every item in that class would get it's stats decreased by 5%.
that should give you a good idea about what to tick and what not.
I picked "Buff Xbow" and "Buff Archer" but I want to clarify that I don't think that any of the weapons combat stats need to change at all except for the slots. Either the heavier Xbows/Bows should be dropped a slot, or the ammo for them should be dropped to 0 slots. Ideally, I think that Xbow + 1h weap + 2slot shield should be possible. They existed, were called pavisier, and were a significant part of the medieval battlefield. It makes the most sense to me to make the bag of (now less quantity, too!) bolts that hangs on your hip could be 0 slots. Or Bolts could be 0 and Steel Bolts 1 slot. I understand that you want to limit the heavy armor + 2h + heavy xbow classes, but if you can carry two polearms, one in hands, one on back, I do not see why you can't do that same config with an Xbow and 2h, just with a little pack of bolts on your belt as well.
There should be a penalty for carrying a lot of stuff, I just thing that it should have to do with weight instead of limiting how much stuff the guy can carry beyond M&Bs 4 item slots. Perhaps to penalize the people carrying multiple weapons, there could be a minus to attack skills based on the extra weight of extra weapons. So the dude with the 2h and Xbow swings slower because of that damned thing hanging on his back, and the bolts on his belt. He can still choose to lug them around, but until he ditches them, he will be a less effective soldier.
EDIT: Also, any 2h that can also be used as a 1h should now be 1 slot. The "fits on belt" rule. Then that leaves all the big massive ones as 2 slot, and that makes sense to me.
Wasn't that the main Samurai loadout? Nodachi, Katana, and Wakizashi? So if humans in real life carried something, but you can't in a video game, that seems backwards.
In general, I like the weapon damages as is. If anything, as a pike man, I think the Pike needs to go back to 280, because 300 seems a bit buggy. I like the unsheathables (I'm having fun dropping my pike and picking it back up when needed heh, makes for more realistic and interesting gameplay). It's just that the slot system seems too limiting.
exactly. and should be the other way around as polearms gives you:
POLEARMS
-LOTmore versatility 2h weapons can stop a horse about as good as polearms, crush blocks and be good at 1 on 1, the one thing they're missing is full support weapons.
- Stun
-side swings with better reach
- very few UNBALANCED weapons
- a single weapon class for CAVALRY and INFANTRY
while twohanded weapons are merely INFANTRY weapons and they should be like they was before. now 2handed round up is:
- twohanded weapons DONT stun
- only blockcrushing weapons are MALLET and GREAT MAUL (we had morningstars, barmaces, iron maces, mallets, great mauls..) This one is just laughable, they have 2 of the 3 block crushing weapons in the game, and you say "only"?
-thrust damage is the lowest compared to 1handed weapons and polearms As it should be, try immitating the animation and see how awkward it is. you're also neglecting the fact that the new 2h thrust animation is almost instant.
-shieldbreakers are all UNBALANCED and SHORT.I'd consider any weapon with 40+ damage to be a shield breaker.
-only good slashers are CLAYMORE, FLAMBERGE and maybe MIAODAOI loled.
- best thrust sword is the german with alaughly26 pierce. 26 is still better than a lot of polearms and 1h weapons, again, they shouldn't be the best thrusting weapon.
- Biased animations that give them more speed and range than what the item stats say.
- Animations that allow long weapons to be effective while face hugging (polearms also have this problem). Really? why should a 5 foot long sword be a better close range weapon than a 1h mace?
Well said for someone who wants to lay waste to all before him. Why must you think of not the single cavalryman, but the cavalry as a whole?
Why do you think of yourself as the lone warrior? If infantry were in a group, they would be much safer from cavalry.
If a two-hander is swinging at you, hold up your shield, and let your teammate bash in his skull! It does not matter if you get the kill, only that you win, for the multiplier.
If an archer is shooting at you, and you have no shield, hide behind someone who does! Or ask a horseman to assist you while you distract the archer.
Cavalry can only bump into one or two people before being stopped, even without a pike.
When 10 archers get together, and focus their fire, Cavalry gets decimated. 10 two handers will tear through almost any defense. 10 crossbowmen will reduce armored men to scrap. 10 spearmen will keep anyone at bay, 10 1h swordsmen will swarm any foe.
Why must you think of only cavalry when they act as a group? Cavalry act together because you learn very early on, that a lone cav at the start of the battle is mincemeat. It is time for everyone else to learn this lesson, and act together if they want to win a battle.
You talk about cav ignoring the full picture, but it is Kesh who ignores it, and would be happy to see cavalry gone from the game, or limited to only 3 per team.
Cavalry is heavily dependent upon the map terrain and composition of the enemy force. In addition, a cavalryman is also heavily dependent upon his horse, a great expense. Cav is forced to spend less on armor and secondary weapons as he must spend all of it on his horse, maybe a shield, and lance, if he equips himself fully, he will quickly run out of money. If the horseman loses his horse he is usually swarmed and beaten to death, and if not, he may find himself inadequately equipped to fight on foot for someone at his level.
As cavalry becomes more popular, both teams will have similar numbers of cavalry, thus balancing it out. Having many of one type working together on a team will always defeat an opposing team without the correct counter or teamwork. This is also why many people are upset with the "banner balance" mechanic.
You might say "You can't balance this game depending upon people to work together!" but that is stupid, what about Strategus? Are there going to be two sets of rules for balance?
This.
Also: What's up with shielders these days? I see few and few. It's basically archers and 2handers or polearms running around swining their apparently heavy weapons like they were lightsabres with feather hilts. They dominate.
Let me fix this for you, (slashed the things that are total bullshit, and put my comments in italics), I also added a few things.
If you can't tell, I voted to "nerf" 2h weapons, though I wouldn't call what I want a nerf. What I want is an animation fix.
This one is just laughable, they have 2 of the 3 block crushing weapons in the game, and you say "only"?<--- oh sure. give onehanders blockcrushing capabilites. i'm sure they'll like it when with the other arm they hold a shield. oh and archery don't have blockcrushing arrows. what a shame... why a great maul should blockcrush and a little wooden arrow can't? oh and give cavalry blockcrushing weapons too! oh wait.. couching isn't blockable. fair to me.
2h weapons can stop a horse about as good as polearmsyou play in singleplayer? because in multiplayer, a not mentally retarded horseman, will not get stabbed by a 120 length sword. guess why cavalry run away from pikes and not from twohanders. i really want to know how your somehow faulty brain work.
As it should be, try immitating the animation and see how awkward it is. you're also neglecting the fact that the new 2h thrust animation is almost instant.old animation wasn't good. the new one either.. why don't you fire up your favorite 3d animation software and show us a good one?
I'd consider any weapon with 40+ damage to be a shield breaker.
26 is still better than a lot of polearms and 1h weapons, again, they shouldn't be the best thrusting weapon.
Animations that allow long weapons to be effective while face hugging (polearms also have this problem). Really? why should a 5 foot long sword be a better close range weapon than a 1h mace
IMO shields need a little nerf. It's funny how a 30mm*30mm shield can automatically stop 99% of arrows.
On the other hand, buff steel shields to make them invulnerable to arrows.
I also think archers need some love: add big quivers with 30/40 arrows each (according to type). They will use only one slot, but they will will require a high weapon master skill value (5-6). Actually full archers pg can't neither have a sword, while melee pg can carry up to 3 shields and still have a good weapon.
Buff agility, the benefits that agility points give you arent as good as strength benefits. The amount of high str builds running around now is ridiculous, strength is the way to go, agi should be buffed or str should be nerfed to allow a greater variety of effective builds.
The balance between weapon classes is great nowadays, so I voted for keep everything as it is.
Are you crazy? Nerf shield? Their "force field" got so nerfed that with my kyte shield (req of 3) I need to perfectly look straight at the archer and he can still hit my feet! If your an archer an cry to shielders, guess what, it's ur counter. If you can't shoot his feet, it's cuz he pumped a good amount of points into his shield skill, (or that you suck at archery?) accept that you can't defeat a shielder as an archer, again it's ur counter!.
Also, archers (I have an alt archer) are perfectly fine right now with the quiver sizes. Why do you think they have put the slot requirement? It's to be sure archers would not be able to shoot tons of arrows on top of having a melee weapon and a warbow/longbow. If you want more arrows, do not carry a melee weapon. Also, if a melee guy tries to carry 3 shield, he will be slow as fuck! As soon as you have 2 shields, you get a huge penalty at ur athletics. So you can't compare guys with 3 shields with archers with 3 quivers... it's really not the same thing. Man I'm tired of ppl crying to nerf their counter class.
Lulz, and why are 15/24 polearm/2h spamming builds running rampant then ? *sees ninja clan sig* Ha ok nvm...
Are you crazy? Nerf shield? Their "force field" got so nerfed that with my kyte shield (req of 3) I need to perfectly look straight at the archer and he can still hit my feet! If your an archer an cry to shielders, guess what, it's ur counter. If you can't shoot his feet, it's cuz he pumped a good amount of points into his shield skill, (or that you suck at archery?) accept that you can't defeat a shielder as an archer, again it's ur counter!.
Also, archers (I have an alt archer) are perfectly fine right now with the quiver sizes. Why do you think they have put the slot requirement? It's to be sure archers would not be able to shoot tons of arrows on top of having a melee weapon and a warbow/longbow. If you want more arrows, do not carry a melee weapon. Also, if a melee guy tries to carry 3 shield, he will be slow as fuck! As soon as you have 2 shields, you get a huge penalty at ur athletics. So you can't compare guys with 3 shields with archers with 3 quivers... it's really not the same thing. Man I'm tired of ppl crying to nerf their counter class.
Are you crazy? Nerf shield? Their "force field" got so nerfed that with my kyte shield (req of 3) I need to perfectly look straight at the archer and he can still hit my feet! If your an archer an cry to shielders, guess what, it's ur counter. If you can't shoot his feet, it's cuz he pumped a good amount of points into his shield skill, (or that you suck at archery?) accept that you can't defeat a shielder as an archer, again it's ur counter!.
Also, archers (I have an alt archer) are perfectly fine right now with the quiver sizes. Why do you think they have put the slot requirement? It's to be sure archers would not be able to shoot tons of arrows on top of having a melee weapon and a warbow/longbow. If you want more arrows, do not carry a melee weapon. Also, if a melee guy tries to carry 3 shield, he will be slow as fuck! As soon as you have 2 shields, you get a huge penalty at ur athletics. So you can't compare guys with 3 shields with archers with 3 quivers... it's really not the same thing. Man I'm tired of ppl crying to nerf their counter class.
Remove construction sites from the game and set them as part of the maps. Replace them with carpenter's tools: pg with carpentier's tools will be able to use standard construction sites on the map to build siege weapons and tents.
To Corrado_Decimo, my replies are in bold. No need for anyone else to click the spoiler unles you want to see a flame war.(click to show/hide)
Just ignore Corrado dude. He's an infantile raging 2h elitist with delusions of grandeur.
Not sure about other classes as I don't play them much, but I think a reduction in damage/speed for all weapons (where is nerf all ) would make the game more fun as longer battles/duels is more fun for me.
What she said.+1
Longbow peirce is a bit much, now it makes other bows seem useless
Make arrows to be a .5 slot weapon. this would allow lower tier bow users to be able to use 2h weapon and polearms while high tier bow user could only use 1 slot weapons.
for example
Strongbow= 1 slot
arrows= .5 slot
arrows= .5 slot
longsword= 2 slot
Total of 4 slots
Longbow = 2 slots
arrows= .5 slot
arows= .5 slot
simple sword = 1 slot
Total of 4 slot
Longbow= 2 slots
arrows= .5 slot
longsword= 2 slots
Total is 4.5 slot and therefore not possible
As a crossbowman I chose nerf xbows.+1
I like the new sniper rifle feel of the arbalest so I still think xbows should be slower and maybe do more damage. And the regular xbow needs to be 2 slot, I want to see the xbow be more exclusive than classic sidearm for 2h characters.
Longbow peirce is a bit much, now it makes other bows seem useless
Make arrows to be a .5 slot weapon. this would allow lower tier bow users to be able to use 2h weapon and polearms while high tier bow user could only use 1 slot weapons.
for example
Strongbow= 1 slot
arrows= .5 slot
arrows= .5 slot
longsword= 2 slot
Total of 4 slots
Longbow = 2 slots
arrows= .5 slot
arows= .5 slot
simple sword = 1 slot
Total of 4 slot
Longbow= 2 slots
arrows= .5 slot
longsword= 2 slots
Total is 4.5 slot and therefore not possible
the only useful bonus to shields weapons 2h's have are in the mid tier, all unbalanced and slower than anything 1h uses(almost all "used" 1hers are in 99+ speed category, good luck killing someone with a 91-94 speed 2h axe of some kind(with unbalanced)
chief ur a noob and everything you posted was false, why don't you go ingame and actually play
polearms own now, u still haves the not unbalanced great loong axe killing everything, then the ridiculous thrust of the long spear should be toned down, I mean a guy can basically thrust into from 1 meter away its ridiculous a 2her IRL would have cut your spears shaft and yes you'd be dead upclose
as it stands polearms are way to go
Horse rear, its BS to say that 2h's are as good against horses as polearms are, we don't have horse rear(I.e. you know the horse stops when it gets hit)
all block crush 2h weapons were removed(oh yes the amazingly slow gimic great maul exists but seriously it sucks)
and YES the best shield bashing weapons are all in the top tier of Polearms
2h has had enough nerfs, leave it alone already my 17p on my masterwork katana(give me a break) can't even pierce mail at 9 powerstrike(wtf!)
and only a retard would say that weapons without bonus to shield over 40 damage can break shields(they can't, not in the time a good 1h will finish u because he gets omnidirectional block)
the only useful bonus to shields weapons 2h's have are in the mid tier, all unbalanced and slower than anything 1h uses(almost all "used" 1hers are in 99+ speed category, good luck killing someone with a 91-94 speed 2h axe of some kind(with unbalanced)
2h is the weakest way to go now, no shield vs ranged or omnidirectional block, many unbalanced weapons, shit thrusts on swords and even weakened cuts on so called "great" swords, no horse rear, bar mace got nerfed into oblivion
anyway thats the actual truth of the game, go play and get long speared
oh yea plus as always u can use polearm or 1h wpf and use a shield without your swings being crippled like 2h(where we get barely any weapons to even wear a shield with, people just cloud what u can actually do in the game mechanics with their own BS
when u look at what each class can do polearms is on top
Polearms: best damage vs shields, shield usable weapons where u get to use polearm wpf, no unbalanced anti shield weapons, horse rear, long range higher damage cuts and thrust than 2h in top tier, best cavalry weapons
1h: easy block mode+blocking stops ranged, good cavalry weapons, extremely fast weapons whose hits tend to land on your face from the animation
2h: good low end weapons, dissapointing almost 3 time nerfed great swords(since .200), katana nerfed to not really having a pierce attack, no horse rear, no shield usable wpf, all bonus vs shields weapons are unbalanced(so you're fighting with slow blocks and feints vs 100 speed one handers yay, flamberge?
Longbow peirce is a bit much, now it makes other bows seem useless
Make arrows to be a .5 slot weapon. this would allow lower tier bow users to be able to use 2h weapon and polearms while high tier bow user could only use 1 slot weapons.
for example
Strongbow= 1 slot
arrows= .5 slot
arrows= .5 slot
longsword= 2 slot
Total of 4 slots
Longbow = 2 slots
arrows= .5 slot
arows= .5 slot
simple sword = 1 slot
Total of 4 slot
Longbow= 2 slots
arrows= .5 slot
longsword= 2 slots
Total is 4.5 slot and therefore not possible
Ok I have highlighted a few points I would like to address (starting from the top going down)
1) you want the great long axe to be unbalanced why? it has 125 reach (1 more the the danish great) 46 cut (its an axe it was designed for cutting) 90 speed which to me seems fair, since it weight is 3.5 and you use two hands to hold it and not just holding it at the bottom, so to me great long axe is fine atm
2) A two handed weapon IRL would probably not chop a spear in half since the wood was very thick, you would need quite a bit of power to do that with a sword.
3) Yes for me some 2h's are just as good against cavalry as polearms I have seen people kill horse's with one stab with the german and danish great's and then seen people stab horse's with the pike and it not die so that seems fine to me even chance, yes polearms are longer two handed weapons we're not made for such long reach.
4) The reason most of the 2h crushthrough weapons were taken out was because there were to many and they were just OP with their speed and damage personally I think it should just be hammers that crushthrough, it seems balanced low speed for high power.
5) Polearms are best against shields since their mostly axes which are built specifically to break shields so stop whining 2h have axes to.
6) Yes 2h did get quite a nerf but so did nearly every class, but they didn't get nerfed enough so the lol stab was taken out, to me that its quite fair to keep lol stab in exchanging it for a few cut or precise since it add allot of reach when its done (can easily out range my great long axe and when done by the right person sometimes my great long Bardiche!) yes the katana probably did get the heaviest nerf out of 2h weapons but pre-patch it was the ultimate spamming weapon that actually hurt not it still hurts and its still f**king fast but just does less damage.
7) 2h are not the weakest class now they can still beat polearms and every other class don't blame the weapon blame the man/woman using it, if you don't know how to doge or use cover then quite simply don't go for archers let a shielder do it. But yes to many weapons in 2h are unbalanced that should be reworked.
8) You don't have crappy thrusts you have the LOL stab need I say more?
9) The barmace was just OP good speed damage and crushthrough was totally unfair for every one who didn't use it people just spammed over head with it so it just crushed through every thing so yes it deserved the nerf!
This is just my opinion on the matter nothing more, Yes allot of people would disagree but no one agrees with every thing in the world its how we make progress.
just wanted to say, even as a shielder, 2handers scare me more than polearm guys. 2h is the best 1v1 wep in the game. as for needing block crush... no. block crush is the stupidest shit in the game, we dont need any more crush through weapons. if you are complaining that pole stun is bad, then how can you possibly advocate weapons that ignore blocks completely?
Prolly cos IRL a huge dude with a massive hammer would crush your skull thru your puny up block. And we're all for realism ofc...
u can prevent bump lance by hittig the horse before bump same with the bump slash.
im after realism too and irl i dont think that i'd try to block an axe or hammer even with a shield, id rather dodging it but we have no ability to dodge the attacks with those poor footwork in game. so there shouldnt be crushthrough at all till we are able to dodge. thats my opinion
Longbow peirce is a bit much, now it makes other bows seem useless
Make arrows to be a .5 slot weapon. this would allow lower tier bow users to be able to use 2h weapon and polearms while high tier bow user could only use 1 slot weapons.
for example
Strongbow= 1 slot
arrows= .5 slot
arrows= .5 slot
longsword= 2 slot
Total of 4 slots
Longbow = 2 slots
arrows= .5 slot
arows= .5 slot
simple sword = 1 slot
Total of 4 slot
Longbow= 2 slots
arrows= .5 slot
longsword= 2 slots
Total is 4.5 slot and therefore not possible
just wanted to say, even as a shielder, 2handers scare me more than polearm guys. 2h is the best 1v1 wep in the game. as for needing block crush... no. block crush is the stupidest shit in the game, we dont need any more crush through weapons. if you are complaining that pole stun is bad, then how can you possibly advocate weapons that ignore blocks completely?
two handers should be slowed down a good bit. Theres no way you can swing a 40 pound axe/sword repeatedly where in real life its even hard to keep the momentum of repeatedly swinging a baseball bat down.
Or add stamina for 2hand users. First hit is the strongest and from there speed and damage are reduced.
Nerf 2h swords even more ? wtf dude ? They alrdy suck.
And you could swing sword fast irl. And this is also a game, and it needs to be balanced, and atm polearms has better reach, dmg, stab and they have a stun. So the 2h´s need to be buffed, not nerfed.
They already suck? LOL
When most people run around with 2hander swinging them like no-other, you can't even counter attack with an 1hander before you get lolstabbed again.
Also the 180 stab is back.
They already suck? LOLQQ, there is no wat to spam a shielder in a balanced build or even an agi one, unless you go full agi ofc.You being spammed just means you have shit footwork and/or skill.
When most people run around with 2hander swinging them like no-other, you can't even counter attack with an 1hander before you get lolstabbed again.
Also the 180 stab is back.
Btw matey is and agi stacker with 8 ATH how on earth he has a problem with giant slow ass no reach hammers beats me... even with your 1h weapon i have no clue how your unable to dogde it.. a friendly advice matey try attacking the guy with the hammer instead of goin towards him with your shield raised attack instead of trying to block it.. its acutally the only weapon ingame where u cant be lasy with your turtle build. In Other words dont wait for the enemy to attack like u would do with every other weapon ingame attack is your best option here.
You must either be lasy or just clueless if u cant counter a hammer user with my 1h alt i laugh at warbeast when he charge at me because i know how to counter it and its really simple just do what i said and you will be fine. Backpedal and swing rinse and repeat =?? = profit!!
ah you are a bright fellow aren't you? it's a shame you dont play on NA servers so i wont get the chance to rip you to pieces.
As I said in my thread about athletics, Athletics is not doing enough right now. what that means is that Mr Great maul with 3 athletics, is fast enough to remain in striking distance DESPITE me backpedaling. P.s. most great maul players are horrible and i just get them to waste their first swing at the air then spam them to death... the problem is when GOOD players take great mauls and stack as much agi as they can. Palatro is always my favourite example of this, he used to rock 7 or 8 athletics with a great maul (that was before they increased STR requirment on it) so you would backpedal from him, and he would run forward into your range, you would swing at him with your superior reach, he would block then line up an overhead, you try to get out of reach, you cant, you die.
anyways, crushthrough hasnt been much of an issue with me since this latest patch, the best news is that very few good players use great mauls these days. I wouldn't mind seeing it removed completely, but I also don't really mind it too much where it is, I generally just stay the hell away from great mauls if i know there is a good player wielding it, I can't backpedal out of their reach, but i can avoid going anywhere near them to begin with.
two handers should be slowed down a good bit. Theres no way you can swing a 40 pound axe/sword repeatedly where in real life its even hard to keep the momentum of repeatedly swinging a baseball bat down.
Or add stamina for 2hand users. First hit is the strongest and from there speed and damage are reduced.
backpedaling isn't the way to get out of reach. turn back 180°, get some distance and engage again. oh wait... is simplier to press the community and nerf the two handers...
Yeah great idea. Show them your unprotected back while you are still in striking range.
first off, i wasnt complaining about 2hers, i was talking specifically about crush through weapons, not all 2hers. secondly, what the other guy said... getting hit in the back sucks.
i do that a lot of times. ofc after parrying a swing. in the maul case, stay out of reach. period. is not written anywhere that you should go face a mauler. is the same thing as running with a twohander/polearm to an archer head on.
well you can try to learn WHEN fast turning 180 degrees, running and doing a surprise thrust/overhead... is the only way to dispatch a small group of enemies without being ganked. footwork and athletics are your friends. use it.
and if you can't, just don't do sarcasm with "great idea" or "fuc*in genius!".
...
Are you crazy? Nerf shield? Their "force field" got so nerfed that with my kyte shield (req of 3) I need to perfectly look straight at the archer and he can still hit my feet! If your an archer an cry to shielders, guess what, it's ur counter. If you can't shoot his feet, it's cuz he pumped a good amount of points into his shield skill, (or that you suck at archery?) accept that you can't defeat a shielder as an archer, again it's ur counter!.
Also, archers (I have an alt archer) are perfectly fine right now with the quiver sizes. Why do you think they have put the slot requirement? It's to be sure archers would not be able to shoot tons of arrows on top of having a melee weapon and a warbow/longbow. If you want more arrows, do not carry a melee weapon. Also, if a melee guy tries to carry 3 shield, he will be slow as fuck! As soon as you have 2 shields, you get a huge penalty at ur athletics. So you can't compare guys with 3 shields with archers with 3 quivers... it's really not the same thing. Man I'm tired of ppl crying to nerf their counter class.
Weeell, onehand weapons are quite short. I am still in their range after a parry.
Swords are supposed to be fast. In real life, there aren't any 40 pound heavy swords. It's a myth. Take look at this: http://www.thearma.org/essays/2HGS.html
I don't know about the weight and speed of two handed axes, though.
Even though I agree somewhat with your point, if you actually read that article they point out that true two handed swords were more of a renaissance thing rather than a medieval thing.Two handed GREAT swords. Text is about them, while it is logical that all of the smaller swords were lighter (such as William Wallace claymore, for example). Two handed swords were used throughout middle ages, and especially in the last century and a half of middle ages (middle ages 476 AD - 1492 AD or 476AD - 1453 AD depending on the periodization also include part of the period of renaissance), while their length peaked in 16th and 17th century. I agree that they weren't predominant weapon of medieval times, but they definitely should be in the game.
cavalry is supposed to counter archers, not foot infantry :/
kill lolhammer with 1h is very easy first of all except steel pick pretty much all other 1h outrange a lolhammer. 2nd if he fail first swing, you can hit twice first than he attack back, (and with steel pick means he is dead) and if you stay near him and he is stupid enought to try an overhead again you just need to circle him use left swing and hit on head.
with a sword 90-100+ range you can pretty much outrange him with right attack and pierce attack all time. never entering the "risk zone"
its speed bonus that need nerf
its speed bonus that need nerf
Actually, this could turn out to be agreat idea.
This way, the real damage output will come from PD and wpf rather than lolturn and such.
You don't have to remove it completely (of course not), but lowering it a bit wouldn't hurt.
cavalry is supposed to counter archers, not foot infantry :/
No. Shielders are archer's counter, not cav.Cavalry are supposed to counter the archers by flanking, but shielders can counter by going head-on. It's simple medieval tactics. :wink:
Why would you remove human impact from the game? O.o
I want a game that I play, not a game that plays itself.
I'm pleased with these results :
Buff throwing :
-ok, it's dead as it is now anyway.
Nerf polearms :
-yes, too fast, too much range, too much damage, something needs to be done for the GLA, LHB, poleaxes and other 4 attacks polearms. Pike-like weapons are fine imo. Maybe they need a little damage buff.
Buff 1h :
-why not, depends on what 1h are buffed.
Buff horses :
- yes if the buff is in armor, charge and/or HP. And maybe a size increase for some horses that have weird bump hitboxes.
-yes, too fast, too much range, too much damage, something needs to be done for the GLA,
I'm pleased with these results :
Buff throwing :
-ok, it's dead as it is now anyway.
Nerf polearms :
-yes, too fast, too much range, too much damage, something needs to be done for the GLA, LHB, poleaxes and other 4 attacks polearms. Pike-like weapons are fine imo. Maybe they need a little damage buff.
Buff 1h :
-why not, depends on what 1h are buffed.
Buff horses :
- yes if the buff is in armor, charge and/or HP. And maybe a size increase for some horses that have weird bump hitboxes.
-Buff Horses - Horse head shot is not neceseary i think. Also cheap horses like Rouncey or Courser can be easily killed with one shot (not headshot) from a crossbow - its not fair. I think also that heavily armored horses are a little too slow. It's like riding a tortoise.
-Buff armor - Heavy armor is usseles. It gives too little protection. I can get killed wearing millanese plate with one fucking thrust from 2h (when i am mounted). Its not fair because sometimes i need to hit people more than once with MW heavy lance riding at full speed. Heavy cavalry in most cases is usseles too, because heavy armor does not give any advantage.
I like its expensive but not worth the effort to use it.
-Nerf Twohanders - I can be killed with one thrust, as i said above, and sometimes (maybe it is illusion caused by ping, I dont know) outranged by 2h thrust if i have Heavy Lance.
And one more. Why my horse stops being hit from the side?! I understood in the chest but not in the stomach or ass...
Heavy whorses is decent when used right. Especially good for 1H cav imo. Also, saying heavy armor is useless shows a clear lack of knowledge. Go off your horse, stand still and get a 2H stab into you. No chance of killing you in one-hit with that armor. It's because of the speed bonus from whorses. You've probably been riding towards him, while he's been moving towards you as well. MASSIVE speed bonus. Speed bonus will help you, but also cripple you sometimes, I.E. fair. Don't buff armor.Yes i was riding almost towards him, but still one strike... its too easy i think. Belive me sometimes i need more than one good HLance thrust to kill some guys (7ps).
Yes i was riding almost towards him, but still one strike... its too easy i think. Belive me sometimes i need more than one good HLance thrust to kill some guys (7ps)
Yes i was riding almost towards him, but still one strike... its too easy i think. Belive me sometimes i need more than one good HLance thrust to kill some guys (7ps).
But still i think heavy armor is not worth its price.
1h cav uses HArmor because think they are closer to enemies but they dont need this armor same as lancers. Oh and when i said about heavy cavalry i ment lancers too.
Only diference as I notice is bow makes less dmg vs HArmor - its good, but still 2 xbow shots (1 headshot) and you are dead knight with shiny armor worth a lot of gold, its same as pesant or light armored guy with gear worth ~300g. (worth i mean upkeep cost)
This is only my opinion and I know as cavalryman i am not objective :)
What xbow are you talking of btw? Arbalest should be able to two-shoot people in high-tier armor, because of their reloading time.I dont know what xbow hits me i dont have much time to ask this bloody bastards ;)
Dude... Get off your ez mode horse and play some 2h and you'll see how "easy" it is.I didnt said its easy, i said its too easy.
I dont know what xbow hits me i dont have much time to ask this bloody bastards ;)
If it was Sniper Xbow its ok, you are right this reaload time... but its ok ONLY for this one xbow :)
I didnt said its easy, i said its too easy.
I dont like to play with op weapon, this is why i dont play as 2h-sword knight.
To anyone whining about cav beeing OP, why arent you yourself playing it? Why arent you on the field lancing everyones arses?
If I run alone against a group of people as a 2-hander, I tend to get shot too. Saying that cavalry isn't easy just because you can't ride straight towards enemies and kill them is just silly.
Fact is, grabbing a courser and a couchable lance will score you insane amounts of kills aslong as you manage to keep cool and not rush in alone against the enemy team during the first two minutes of the round.
No. Shielders are archer's counter, not cav.
To anyone whining about cav beeing OP, why arent you yourself playing it? Why arent you on the field lancing everyones arses?
Because you suck and the first person you encounter on the battlefield is generally your last. If you cant downblock, and instead try to jump and slash/stab the riders head off with your puny 90-130 reach weapon versus the 190 reach one. You should die giggling over your own foolish greed. When you encounter a pikeman? Do you also try to outrange him and QQ when he stabs you?
I retired from the mounted class for the time beeing, but me myself who have had alot of experience as a lancer cav knows that all I have to do as infantry is stand on a slightly elevated area or near a wall and your as good as 100% untouchable from cav.
People shouldent be allowed to complain about classes they havent tried for atleast a generation.(New generation)
Cavalry are supposed to counter the archers by flanking, but shielders can counter by going head-on. It's simple medieval tactics. :wink:
cav>archers>footmen>spears>cavArcher are the best vs cavalry, especialy against horsearchers.They can kill horse very easy.
Archer are the best vs cavalry, especialy against horsearchers.They can kill horse very easy.
Cav>infantry>archers>cav this is how it looks.
you are right.
They used cavalry till 1942 because they sucks against ranged -.-
horse archers are not to be take into account for the simple reasons that they are not in standard European armies. Only mongols used them (with great results) against the heavy shielded and armoured Byzantine infantry that could not even reach them.
In this game there are a lot of stupid things, like people jumping like volleyball players with a 30kg plate armor + 2*15kg shields + 6kg sword and kill a charging horseman, but in real world archers could throw one, maybe two volleys before cavalry could cover that 300 meters (long bow range) and slaughtered them.
aah yes but English Longbowmen could easily fire 6 arrows a minute so if there were 300 longbowmen in a unit they could fire 1800 a minute so the cav would either be dead already or they would flee, unlikely as it is IF they did carry on charging they would be so few that they would be picked off.Don't forget heavy cavalary is armored and have shields. Its not easy to penetrate fulplate armor with longbow (depends of angle etc). Even if the horse is hit it does not stop charging - herd instinct.
Don't forget heavy cavalary is armored and have shields. Its not easy to penetrate fulplate armor with longbow (depends of angle etc). Even if the horse is hit it does not stop charging - herd instinct.
Read about polish Husaria, they very often charge at muskeeters and canons and after battle losees maybe 10% riders.
When musketers shoot they lossen ranks, and tighten when they reload, charging at full speed. And this beautiful 6,2m long lances... pike is about 5-5,5m and goes at an angle :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_H0Bds79f4U&feature=related
aah yes but English Longbowmen could easily fire 6 arrows a minute so if there were 300 longbowmen in a unit they could fire 1800 a minute so the cav would either be dead already or they would flee, unlikely as it is IF they did carry on charging they would be so few that they would be picked off.
It's always funny to see discussions about video game balance devolve into people debating realism and history.
"THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!" he said, as he sat behind his computer screen, after having been killed by arrow fire. He furiously typed, sweat glistening on his brow, "YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO KILL ME BECAUSE IN THE 12TH CENTURY-" He continued in that manner well into the night. His character of course wore samurai armor and carried an English bill hook.
It's always funny to see discussions about video game balance devolve into people debating realism and history.
you didn't get the point :/
it's not a question about realism.
The problem is that people believe in strange (and illogical) thinks and use that to justify changes in game play.
with it you can only defend or attack; not both at the same time, unlike the shield users. what really makes the 2h weapon unique? nothing, thats what.:shock:
both at the same time
1.) Buff Horses
Anything below a destrier is practically worthless, save the courser for its exceptional speed. anything above that is far to expensive, and slow as hell, which amounts to death in any battle server.
a.) reduce cost
b.) increase armor
c.) increase health.
choose one or do all three, any of the options would remedy the situation
2.) Buff 2h swords
quite simply, compared to sword and board and polearms, this weapon is weak. its slower and shorter than polearms, and with it you can only defend or attack; not both at the same time, unlike the shield users. what really makes the 2h weapon unique? nothing, thats what.
a.) add 3 speed to all weapons
b.) add 2 damage to all weapons
c.) reduce price by 15%
choose one or do all three, any of these options would make it better.
3.) Nerf polearms
polearms are a very touchy subject because there are many different types; they are very versatile. the concept of the 2h weapon is that one is better than 2. the concept of the polearms is the bigger the better. gamewise, this plays out as the 2h sword being outranged, outdamaged, and most of the time outspeeded. oh yeah, and if you get hit by it, you're stunned.
a.) remove stun animation, which sucks ass anyway, and is VERY disorienting.
b.) slow weapons down by 2 speed
c.) Nerf iron staff; its VERY OP at the moment, being able to one shot my palfrey with a STAB, and if that doesnt do it, its so fast they can swing again.
add
c.) lances can be swung left to right, heavy lance is 75 speed.
d.) add 3 pierce to all thrust attacks.
4.) Nerf Shield
As it stands, shields are VERY strong. TOO STRONG. a buckler can take a dozen arrows with its invisible ghost reach, and a huscarl shield is nigh destructible.
i propose that all shields be reduced by 100 points for high tier, 50 points for mid tier, and 25 points for low tier, OR that shield resistance be reduced drastically.
i say this as a sword and board fan, that also does 2h; SHIELDS ARE OP.
and that is why i voted those.
2hand is fast as hell! nerf 2 hand speed to sub 90!
and 1 handers are not? O_o
are you freaking talking about 2h´s being op ? clearly you know nothing, prob just some haters.
Have you seen how many people which left 2h swords ? there is a reason for that ? god sake
And Polearm is superior to 2h:
Better reach
better dmg
not getting stunned when you stab
having a sick polearm stun
and they are same speed, or faster. (And its a polearm, its not supose to be as fast as a 2h, specialy not with these stats.)
Yeah something should be done.Give +10 speed to all 2h swords,also +15 damage.And thrust should always kill with one hit.All players with 2h sword should have mental shield that will protect them from ranged.I know,thats not enough and 2h swords will be useless anyway,but 2h users are the most skilled players in crpg,I think they will like such challenge.
not getting stunned when you stab
and they are same speed, or faster. (And its a polearm, its not supose to be as fast as a 2h, specialy not with these stats.)
"All the top players are using 2-h Swords, it must be OP! Nerf!" - It's not true, there are alot of good players with other weapons. These very same "top players" would rape you over and over again, regardless of what kind of weapon they use. Why? Because they are far better and more skilled then you. Simple as that. The majority of people I win against when I use a big sword will still lose to me even if I would switch to a stick.
Wrong. Both can be stunned when stabbing blocks.
Poles are a tiny bit slower, rather than faster, compared to 2H of the same tier.
1.) Buff Horses
Anything below a destrier is practically worthless, save the courser for its exceptional speed. anything above that is far to expensive, and slow as hell, which amounts to death in any battle server.
a.) reduce cost
b.) increase armor
c.) increase health.
choose one or do all three, any of the options would remedy the situation
2.) Buff 2h swords
quite simply, compared to sword and board and polearms, this weapon is weak. its slower and shorter than polearms, and with it you can only defend or attack; not both at the same time, unlike the shield users. what really makes the 2h weapon unique? nothing, thats what.
a.) add 3 speed to all weapons
b.) add 2 damage to all weapons
c.) reduce price by 15%
choose one or do all three, any of these options would make it better.
3.) Nerf polearms
polearms are a very touchy subject because there are many different types; they are very versatile. the concept of the 2h weapon is that one is better than 2. the concept of the polearms is the bigger the better. gamewise, this plays out as the 2h sword being outranged, outdamaged, and most of the time outspeeded. oh yeah, and if you get hit by it, you're stunned.
a.) remove stun animation, which sucks ass anyway, and is VERY disorienting.
b.) slow weapons down by 2 speed
c.) Nerf iron staff; its VERY OP at the moment, being able to one shot my palfrey with a STAB, and if that doesnt do it, its so fast they can swing again.
add
c.) lances can be swung left to right, heavy lance is 75 speed.
d.) add 3 pierce to all thrust attacks.
4.) Nerf Shield
As it stands, shields are VERY strong. TOO STRONG. a buckler can take a dozen arrows with its invisible ghost reach, and a huscarl shield is nigh destructible.
i propose that all shields be reduced by 100 points for high tier, 50 points for mid tier, and 25 points for low tier, OR that shield resistance be reduced drastically.
i say this as a sword and board fan, that also does 2h; SHIELDS ARE OP.
and that is why i voted those.
Like this:
Elegant Poleaxe
weapon length: 132
speed rating: 92
And as darkfox said, one of the best 2h's out there danish:
Danish Greatsword
weapon length: 124
speed rating: 92
oh my god... please ignore everything this man said. please.
1. cav already rapes lots of face... if you have trouble doing well with cav, you are doing it wrong.
2. 2h sword is the best wep class in the game for 1v1 fighting. polestun is all well and scary but go to a duel server and see what all the top duelists use... 2handers. mostly longswords. 2h is plenty strong as is.
3. pole stun... well i dont really care if its there or not. other than that... poles are good where they are. they have a ton of versatility but are best as teamwork/support weapons, whether poking from behind an ally or killing horses or breaking shields... they are not superior to 2h in 1v1 combat, though they hold their own.
as for your lance changes... no... lances do not need to swing left and right... its already pretty generous that you can even use them off horseback... theres a reason they are a cav only wep. p.s. they do plenty of damage as is.
4. shields are nerfed enough already. i got the benefits of my heirlooms cut in half after i reassigned 3 of my points into heirlooming a shield with the respec. i understand that you dont like shields that dont break in one hit, but deal with it. shields are an excellent teamwork piece of equipment, they cover against ranged weapons, and they allow the user to block multiple enemies at once. p.s. if you are upset that you cant break them fast enough, get an axe... shields are easy to counter unless you are a dedicated archer/xbow. polearms, 2h and 1h all have shield breaker weapons. the same logic leads people to using blunt/pierce weapons to hurt tin cans. you wont see me screaming that we should make all armour give 25% less armour and cost more; instead i bring a pick to the field as my back up weapon.
p.s. you are clearly NOT a sword and board fan.
1.) Horses are little more than *spay and prey vehicles which are only effective when the victim is unaware, or bent over for the lance. 90% of the time, most people see it coming, and have a 2h weapon, a spear, or something to that effect. if not, they are still capable of swinging their 1h sword at their horse.
*see below
2.) your argument is *inane. just because alot of people use 2h in duel, doesn't mean they are better, does it? its like saying that white people are better than black people because there is more. also, if you haven't noticed, most polearm users are at the top in duel, if they play.
* this is not incorrect spelling.
3.) they are indeed superior, as i use them against 2 handers. war spear, anyone? Bec? also, it makes no sense i cannot swing my lance left and right, as its illogical.
4.) i AM INDEED a shield user, and i hardly ever have my non heirloomed, heavy heater break, unless its against a axe user, and my argument is not that they take alot of abuse, creating a lot of turtles. archers i do this often with :)
p.s. it is clear that you are a rude prick, and you should learn to agree to disagree instead of opening your jowl spewing vile, ill-mannered rebuttals designed to make me look like a fool. i don't appreciate your drivel, and i don't appreciate your nullifying behavior.
so next time, when you look at someone's honest opinion on a change, i recommend you follow these steps...
1.) read and intelligently, but temperately approach the subject. repeat if successful, or skip to two if not.
2.) if unable to follow 1.), turn computer chair away from desk
3.) promptly pull head out of ass, making sure that the head is clear from the said orifice.
4.) if head is still not out of ass at this point, go see a orthopedist and be sure that your spine is not permanently bent in a U shape from asshatery.
It is one thing to disagree, which im sure many will and have, with my opinion. its another to be a rude asshole about it, and i don't appreciate it in the least.
-1
its like saying that white people are better than black people because there is more.
May I say that it is likely the average player will vote to buff their most used playstyle and nerf their natural counter. I don't see how this will give you any accurate data, but welcome the chance to offer honest feedback nonetheless.Not entirely true (In my case, anyways.)
Polearms doesn't need a nerf, they are indeed more versatile then 2h weapons, but on 1vs1 fight polearms tend to loose. 2h weapons might seems shorter, but as other said polearms are shorter then their stats suggest.
Also with 2h is easier to feint, they are more difficult to block and they are useful in closed spaces too, while most of polearms can't.
I find it amusing that once 2Hs were nerfed, polearms suddenly became ungodly overpowered, even though polearms as a whole have not seen any major buffs for many months now. I guess people were too busy complaining about being lolstabbed and lolslashed by everyone and their greatswords, and archers and their longswords.
Remember the Looney Toons Axe? Or the old Bec de Corbin? Or the poleaxes from when they were first introduced? Or the Long Hafted Spiked Mace a few months ago?
I switched over from 2Hs to polearms a few months ago. Although polearms have received no buffs during that time period (they have either been nerfed or seen no changes), my weapon has magically gone from unexceptional to SUPERGODPROHAXNERFNAO. I truly cannot offer an explanation for this.
Clearly the only solution is to give 2handers a special move... i think if they press forward up back down forward then attack they should be able to send a WIND SLICE across the battlefield to one shot anyone in the way. that would be fair, i think it is necessary for the underpowered 2handers.
Clearly the only solution is to give 2handers a special move... i think if they press forward up back down forward then attack they should be able to send a WIND SLICE across the battlefield to one shot anyone in the way. that would be fair, i think it is necessary for the underpowered 2handers.
But thats a shielder.
Clearly the only solution is to give 2handers a special move... i think if they press forward up back down forward then attack they should be able to send a WIND SLICE across the battlefield to one shot anyone in the way. that would be fair, i think it is necessary for the underpowered 2handers.
Suggestion that will make everyone hate me....
Nerf, everything.....just too many weapons that are way too effective.
TO me, that poll proves that most people just vote whatever they want nerfed / buffed instead of what they really think would benefit the balance of the game. :|yup this
To me, that poll proves that most people just vote whatever they want nerfed / buffed instead of what they really think would benefit the balance of the game. :|
Well, I had thought this might be the case, but if it was, I would have expected a lot more votes to buff 2h, nerf horses and nerf shields.Well maybe some of those 2h spammers have a 1h alt or aspire to become cav one day.
Yeh... once you have an alt in just about every class, all you want is good balance. I voted 'buff thrown' and nothing else as well.
The strongest votes by a fair margin (taking into account the amount of opposite votes) are:fixed
Buff thrown (clear winner)
Nerf polearms
Buff 1h
Buff horses
Nerf two handed weapons
Nerf crossbows
Buff armour
To me, that poll proves that most people just vote whatever they want nerfed / buffed instead of what they really think would benefit the balance of the game. :|
Finally, 4.5% consider this mod balanced/don't give a fuck.
Agreed. I actually voted for the balance, asked for buffing throwing and nerfing cav, as a polearm user.
Wait.
Aw crap D: . Why didn't i notice it?:mad: . Is it normal that a war horse needs 2/3 stabs from a pike to die? And, well, the throwing should actually be buffed? I see no-one running around with it. Not that i'm saying if few people use it, it is underpowered, but the tradeoffs are too big when you want to go mainly throwing.
i voted nerf armour :D
also, i think 1h is fine as is... if anything id say lower reach on some of the 1handers...
I think you guys can safely assume that the "buff armor" vote was quite a few people saying "I wear armor, lets buff that!" Since more people wear armor then don't. I agree that plate is already pretty effective.
but a price decrease for armors.LOL
LOL
Mmh... You think prices are low enough or my english wasn't right ? :?
I'd like it if the buff wasn't a stat buff, but a price decrease for armors.
I think you guys can safely assume that the "buff armor" vote was quite a few people saying "I wear armor, lets buff that!" Since more people wear armor then don't. I agree that plate is already pretty effective.
The close results seem to confirm that everything is pretty balanced, the only one standing out is throwing that is being worked on anyway.
try kill a tin can with an one hand axe... it's going to take a while :DTry killing a tin can with a katana or any other speedy 2h weapon, it's going to take nearly as long as if it were 1 hander. Probably only 1 or 2 hit difference at most, which is how it should be, otherwise there'd be absolutely no reason to use a two-hander, now would there?
The close results seem to confirm that everything is pretty balanced, the only one standing out is throwing that is being worked on anyway.Definitely, You simply can't ignore the 125 votes of "leave everything as it is". Subtract 125 from all the buff/nerfs of each option and it's a much more telling picture. Then you have to account for the people who voted to buff/nerf a class simply because it's their class or the counter to their class. Cosmos' graphs are nice, but they don't take either of these two things into account. I also don't know of a single skilled one-hander that thinks they need a buff so really, aside from the buff to throwing, I wouldn't imagine much needs to be done.
You simply can't ignore the 125 votes of "leave everything as it is". Subtract 125 from all the buff/nerfs of each option and it's a much more telling picture. Then you have to account for the people who voted to buff/nerf a class simply because it's their class or the counter to their class. Cosmos' graphs are nice, but they don't take either of these two things into account.
You're being silly, for two reasons.A) This entire part makes zero sense to me, for multiple reasons. First, and the least important reason, I'm not sure where you're getting 17. With how you're suggesting to weigh the "no change" votes, there is no way that these votes could have an effect on the poll anyway. You're adding 17 to both sides of an equation. There can't be a change unless one vote already has fewer than 17 votes to begin with. These votes mean nothing because of how you're weighing them. Also, no less than 18 votes? A "no change" vote would be more accurately examined by simply adding a "no change" option for all 9 classes. Thus it's 9 votes, not 18, it's not the same as having both a buff and a nerf vote.
a) 125 votes for no change, yes, but out of 973. I don't know about you, but to me that suggests most people still want to see something changed. Now, we have how many poll options? 19. So what you're trying to do is to count each of those "no change" votes no less than 18 times. The correct number to subtract would be seven votes from each other option. Hardly much of an issue, and honestly a pretty pointless thing to do in the first place.
b) You don't have access to that data, so it's useless to speculate about. Best thing to do is assume it's more or less equal for all cases and look at the balance of nerf/buff votes, like Cosmos did -- at least while we wait for what Vargas has to say.
A) This entire part makes zero sense to me, for multiple reasons. First, and the least important reason, I'm not sure where you're getting 17.
With how you're suggesting to weigh the "no change" votes, there is no way that these votes could have an effect on the poll anyway. You're adding 17 to both sides of an equation. There can't be a change unless one vote already has fewer than 17 votes to begin with. These votes mean nothing because of how you're weighing them
Also, no less than 18 votes? A "no change" vote would be more accurately examined by simply adding a "no change" option for all 9 classes. Thus it's 9 votes, not 18, it's not the same as having both a buff and a nerf vote.
A better way would be: A "buff" vote representing a 1, a "nerf" as -1 and a "no change", as 0. Cosmos already did this with his graph, he just left out the 0 part.
Using throwing as an example to see the significant impact:
(264(1)+89(-1)+125(0))/(264+89+125) = 0.37 37% in favor of a throwing buff
If you ignore the "no change" options, you get:
(264-89)/(264+89) = .50 50% in favor of a throwing buff
Quite a bit different, though it's still easy to see either way, that throwing needs a buff.
I'm not sure where you're getting 17. I don't see myself using that number even once in the entire post.I meant 7.
so it would be (264-89)/973 = 18% votes for a buff after taking into consideration the nerf votes, which offset some of the buff votes.
The reason it's necessary to have it in this form, rather than Cosmos' (264-89) to show the effective votes, is that this doesn't put the numbers in perspective at all, it doesn't relate them to anything. Basically the difference is that were you to make a graph on my formula(simply taking his totals and dividing by the total number of voters) is that it actually relates the same data to the total votes, thus taking into consideration the "no change" votes.
I meant 7.Your way of calculating shows nothing.
I failed to realize one simple thing, that is: If someone casts only one vote to buff their class, they're actually voting 8 other times for "no change".
Indeed I was being silly, the whole issue to begin with was silly. The focus should have been on the fact that there were indeed 973 total voters but only, technically, 353 relating to throwing. So indeed, my issue with the 125 votes not being counted was flawed from the start, I should have simply focused on all of the votes that weren't placed for either buffing/nerfing a specific item type. So it should be (264-89)/973(as this is the true total vote number).
The reason it's necessary to have it in this form, rather than Cosmos' (264-89) to show the effective votes, is that this doesn't put the numbers in perspective at all, it doesn't relate them to anything. Basically the difference is that were you to make a graph on my formula(simply taking his totals and dividing by the total number of voters) is that it actually relates the same data to the total votes, thus taking into consideration the "no change" votes.
Sorry for being an idiot initially, but the problem still remained, I was just forgetting that one detail.
so it would be (264-89)/973 = 18% votes for a buff after taking into consideration the nerf votes, which offset some of the buff votes.
I've made a few charts to help people have a better overview of the survey. Moderatormay you put the chart in main page?
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
And some stats :
Buff-Nerf = 182 out of 2632 so people didn't vote only to nerf or only to buff
Total buff vote= 1407 out of 2632
Total Nerf vote = 1225 out of 2632
Throw = 175 big buff ( more than 150)
One handed = 116 good buff (more than 100)
Armor = 82 middle buff (more than 50)
Horses = 48 Little buff ( more or less equal to 50 )
Shield and bows = 3 and -2 nothing to do
two handed weapon = -40 middle nerf
Crossbow = -89 good nerf
Polearm = -111 good nerf
I think that there is a easy solution to the 2h/polearm hate. And as Kafein wrote in another post, the polearms is dominating the 2h's atm. I could get a list of reasons why polearm is better, but i will make this easy.
2h:
- Fix the stab animation (it moves like its only 3 fps)
- Remove the stun after your stab gets blocked (which means enemy can hit you, without you having a chance to block it)
Polearm:
-Remove the polearm stun. (you can get hit twice without having a chance to block)
That is from my point of view, the only big problems.
No the stun after the stab needs to get fixed. A sword should be a fast weapon(other than flammy). And the fact that the big ass polearms doesnt get stunned like the 2hs does is retarded.
Edit: Actaully, there's no need for 2h stab fix. Just get rid of polearm stun, faulty hitboxes and melee is fine.
I'm pretty sure polearms get stunned too at blocked thrusts.
I demand to be buffed. Nerf eneryone else and give me a 100str increase so as I can have uber epeen and feel like MAN!
Couching, buff. Increase length of jousting lance to 290 so that pokes don't out range it in a head on charge (SO STUPID!).Even if u were joking u won -1 bar man.
Even if u were joking u won -1 bar man.
Poke-lancing is actually stupid and unrealistic the way it is in Warband. Medieval cavalry was dominated by 1h and couched lances because one handed poking lances didn't packed enough impact (that's why people developped couched lances in the first place).depends on what you call mediaval, and how much power it takes to "pack enough impact". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsSS5D7GCCM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsSS5D7GCCM)
bumping to the top.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login+1
+1There is a button for that.
There is a button for that.1+