1
Suggestions Corner / New repair values are much too high
« on: July 11, 2011, 04:55:35 am »
New repair values are too punishing. Even with 20k worth of items I'm hemorrhaging gold.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1]
2
Suggestions Corner / Revert to the old armor soak values
« on: July 11, 2011, 04:40:48 am »
New ones are terrible. Archers can now 1 shot people with a fair amount of consistently. The old values were fine, but the new system gave a huge buff to archers.
3
General Discussion / Why is trading limited to your main character?
« on: June 18, 2011, 03:46:17 am »
I don't understand the reasoning behind this limitation. I have several alts, all of which I play regularly with, but when I try to aquire something like a heirloomed horse for my cav alt, I am unable to do so.
As it stands, there is no possible way to exploit the system. A main character gets heirlooms faster than a gen 1 alt. Aside from archers, all classes have similar gold income.
Is there a chance this restriction will be lifted in the future?
As it stands, there is no possible way to exploit the system. A main character gets heirlooms faster than a gen 1 alt. Aside from archers, all classes have similar gold income.
Is there a chance this restriction will be lifted in the future?
4
Spam / Buff dresses
« on: June 16, 2011, 06:40:42 pm »
Seriously, who removed the ability for male characters to wear dresses? My male characters long for the ability to dangle freely in the movement uninhibited free flowing fine silks from the khergit heights.
Digital cross-dressers of the world unite!
Digital cross-dressers of the world unite!
5
General Discussion / Tying block directions to a key
« on: June 08, 2011, 12:46:23 am »
Two questions
1) Is tying a specific block direction (i.e.: downblock) to a key via macro or some other method legal. This would mean that instead of using your movement keys or mouse to block, you would have to press a single key, like "1."
2) If, and only if, it is legal, how would you go about implementing it?
Please only respond if your opinion on the matter has any sort of official influence or knowledge of the matter.
1) Is tying a specific block direction (i.e.: downblock) to a key via macro or some other method legal. This would mean that instead of using your movement keys or mouse to block, you would have to press a single key, like "1."
2) If, and only if, it is legal, how would you go about implementing it?
Please only respond if your opinion on the matter has any sort of official influence or knowledge of the matter.
6
Suggestions Corner / A new approach to lancing
« on: May 30, 2011, 01:54:12 am »
Lancers need some changes.
As people are starting to notice (and with a fair amount of satisfactions, I can say "I told you so!") cavalry has become more common after the last major patch. While the causes of this are debatable, I think its past due that we re-examine the lance.
There are two ways to use the lance: poking, and couching. Out of the two, poking is much stronger than couching.
Strengths of Poke-lancing
Weaknesses of Poke-Lancing
Strengths of Couch Lancing
Weaknesses of Couch Lancing
As you can clearly see, out of the two types of combat, poke-lancing is clearly superior in-game. This presents a number of problems.
First off, it should be noted that poke-lancing is a historically more-primitive than couched lances. Physics-wise, it makes little sense that poke-lancing deals nearly as much, if not just as much damage as a couched lance. Because the arm is extended, less force is transferred from the horse and rider, to the single point of the lance. A couched lance transfers significantly more force and, to quote historian Mike Loads, "horse, man, spear: a single projectile."
However, I am of the philosophy that balancing a game around history or reality is not always a good policy, but in this case, it would be a smart thing to do. Here is my reasoning.
As I noted earlier, a couched lance has significantly more drawbacks than lance-poking. Because of this, a skilled player has no reason to couch a lance over thrusting with it. Thrusting is safer, its just as deadly, is not difficult to do. Couching a lance, on the other-hand, is a high risk, high reward tactic. It is more balanced than poke-lancing.
Here are my suggestions
Implementing these changes would encourage other forms of mounted combat other than the use of lances.
A few disclaimers:
Yes, I do have a cavalry character, but this is by no means my only character. I have made these suggestions from my experiences of playing on both sides of the horse.
Yes, I do have a long history of encouraging cavalry nerfs.
Yes, I will jump down your throat if you say something stupid because you did not read the entire post.
That said, what are your thoughts?
As people are starting to notice (and with a fair amount of satisfactions, I can say "I told you so!") cavalry has become more common after the last major patch. While the causes of this are debatable, I think its past due that we re-examine the lance.
There are two ways to use the lance: poking, and couching. Out of the two, poking is much stronger than couching.
Strengths of Poke-lancing
- ~+50 weapon reach
- Extremely high damage
- Fast recovery time
- The ability to block without a shield
Weaknesses of Poke-Lancing
- Requires timing
- Can be easily manually blocked
- Can be consistently chambered by a good player
- Cannot be used by all lances
Strengths of Couch Lancing
- Does not require power strike
- Very high damage
- Fairly easy to time
- Cannot be manual-blocked
- Less expensive equipment
Weaknesses of Couch Lancing
- Reduced weapon length
- Leaves the horse vulnerable to short spears
- Very long recharge time
- Requires speeds not always obtainable by some horses
- More predictable
- Requires longer stretches of open, level field
As you can clearly see, out of the two types of combat, poke-lancing is clearly superior in-game. This presents a number of problems.
First off, it should be noted that poke-lancing is a historically more-primitive than couched lances. Physics-wise, it makes little sense that poke-lancing deals nearly as much, if not just as much damage as a couched lance. Because the arm is extended, less force is transferred from the horse and rider, to the single point of the lance. A couched lance transfers significantly more force and, to quote historian Mike Loads, "horse, man, spear: a single projectile."
However, I am of the philosophy that balancing a game around history or reality is not always a good policy, but in this case, it would be a smart thing to do. Here is my reasoning.
As I noted earlier, a couched lance has significantly more drawbacks than lance-poking. Because of this, a skilled player has no reason to couch a lance over thrusting with it. Thrusting is safer, its just as deadly, is not difficult to do. Couching a lance, on the other-hand, is a high risk, high reward tactic. It is more balanced than poke-lancing.
Here are my suggestions
- Disable manual blocking on all lances
- Lower the damage value on all thrustable lances across the board significantly (20-22p should be more than enough)
- Reduce the cool-down period for couch-lancing by about half
- Lower the required speed for couch-lancing. Since damage is tied to speed, this would balance itself.
- Add a chance to drop a thrusted lance on a high damage hit
Implementing these changes would encourage other forms of mounted combat other than the use of lances.
A few disclaimers:
Yes, I do have a cavalry character, but this is by no means my only character. I have made these suggestions from my experiences of playing on both sides of the horse.
Yes, I do have a long history of encouraging cavalry nerfs.
Yes, I will jump down your throat if you say something stupid because you did not read the entire post.
That said, what are your thoughts?
7
Suggestions Corner / Either enable blocking on all lances, or disable on all
« on: May 27, 2011, 08:44:21 pm »
Most of you are unaware, but the couching only lances are unable to block even though it does not list it as such on the website. This gives poking lances a huge advantage. Either enable blocking on all lances, or disable on all.
:edit: there seems to be some confusion, so let me clarify
Lances that can only be used for couching, cannot be used to manual block. This means that a jousting lance cannot block an incoming attack, while a heavy lance can.
:edit: there seems to be some confusion, so let me clarify
Lances that can only be used for couching, cannot be used to manual block. This means that a jousting lance cannot block an incoming attack, while a heavy lance can.
8
General Discussion / Why is ranged disallowed in DTV?
« on: May 20, 2011, 02:04:17 am »
Title says it all. It is completely unreasonable to disable ranged in DTV
9
Suggestions Corner / Dedicated backstabbing weapons
« on: May 19, 2011, 04:17:13 am »
"That peasant's a spy!"
Many games have worked in a backstab feature, where a player is instantly killed.
I'm not suggesting an instant-kill weapon, because it would fit the pacing of warband and c-rpg, but a high pierce damage 1h dagger that cannot be used with a shield could introduce a new style of play.
Here is something along the lines I am thinking of
Type: 1h
Length: 47
Speed: 96
Swing Damage: 22c
Thrust: 48p
Cannot be used with shield
Cannot block
Slots: 1
Requirements: Not important at the moment
A player who uses this would have to be an exceptional chamber blocker and would have to sneak up on an opponent to get it used properly. This weapon could introduce an entire new class to the game.
I know 48p is high, but here are some arguments on why it would be balanced
1: Other weapons do as high as 43b un-heirloomed. 48p would not carry the same desirable knock-down effects
2: No crush through. The weapon can be blocked
3: No shield, and no blocking, making this weapon undesirable for a primary weapon
4: Length is shorter than hammers in the game
5: It takes a weapon slot
Don't burn me alive if you don't agree, but I think it would be a very cool weapon.
P.s. My main character is a polearm character, so don't go screaming bias
Many games have worked in a backstab feature, where a player is instantly killed.
I'm not suggesting an instant-kill weapon, because it would fit the pacing of warband and c-rpg, but a high pierce damage 1h dagger that cannot be used with a shield could introduce a new style of play.
Here is something along the lines I am thinking of
Type: 1h
Length: 47
Speed: 96
Swing Damage: 22c
Thrust: 48p
Cannot be used with shield
Cannot block
Slots: 1
Requirements: Not important at the moment
A player who uses this would have to be an exceptional chamber blocker and would have to sneak up on an opponent to get it used properly. This weapon could introduce an entire new class to the game.
I know 48p is high, but here are some arguments on why it would be balanced
1: Other weapons do as high as 43b un-heirloomed. 48p would not carry the same desirable knock-down effects
2: No crush through. The weapon can be blocked
3: No shield, and no blocking, making this weapon undesirable for a primary weapon
4: Length is shorter than hammers in the game
5: It takes a weapon slot
Don't burn me alive if you don't agree, but I think it would be a very cool weapon.
P.s. My main character is a polearm character, so don't go screaming bias
10
General Discussion / Frequent small change patch> rare massive change patch
« on: May 13, 2011, 09:08:50 pm »
I've voiced this issue to many people on NA, but all the devs are in EU.
You ever play starcraft 2? Ever wonder why Starcraft 2 is heralded for its great balance? Its because they gradually make small changes in their patches until they fine-tune the balance just right.
The way c-RPG has been developing, the balance is set between two extremes: Max volume and mute. Often times you will have two good ideas to balance a class or weapon be implemented, but since you implemented them both, its overkill.
Release a patch a month, and make small changes each patch. For instance, a single patch changing the slot system so that 2h and polearms now require 2 slots would have been fine. Next month implement DTV by itself. Patch after that, change throwing by reducing ammo. After that, continue to make changes until things are well balanced.
Stop with the overkill; regular small changes are better than a rare giant patch.
You ever play starcraft 2? Ever wonder why Starcraft 2 is heralded for its great balance? Its because they gradually make small changes in their patches until they fine-tune the balance just right.
The way c-RPG has been developing, the balance is set between two extremes: Max volume and mute. Often times you will have two good ideas to balance a class or weapon be implemented, but since you implemented them both, its overkill.
Release a patch a month, and make small changes each patch. For instance, a single patch changing the slot system so that 2h and polearms now require 2 slots would have been fine. Next month implement DTV by itself. Patch after that, change throwing by reducing ammo. After that, continue to make changes until things are well balanced.
Stop with the overkill; regular small changes are better than a rare giant patch.
11
Game Balance Discussion / RIP Dedicated throwing
« on: May 12, 2011, 10:01:28 pm »
Here lies dedicated throwers
January 2011 - May 2011
Rest In Peace.
January 2011 - May 2011
Rest In Peace.
12
Beginner's Help and Guides / "You do not have enough throwing WPF"
« on: May 07, 2011, 07:20:26 am »
What is the formula to determine throwing now. How is power throw and WPF related?
Also, why the hell do jarrids count for 2 slots? I have to say, your nerf to throwing was quite heavy handed and very overzealous.
Also, why the hell do jarrids count for 2 slots? I have to say, your nerf to throwing was quite heavy handed and very overzealous.
13
Game Balance Discussion / Pike Overnerfed
« on: May 02, 2011, 08:47:58 am »
Despite the removal of cavalry's 360 degree turret style pokes, cavalry will soon be the strongest builds in the game.
Its not that cavalry have any sort of item or horse which is instant win, its that their main counter was overnerfed.
In this patch, the pike received a number of changes, including significant damage reduction on heirloomed versions of the weapon.
The nerfs that cause problems with the overall balance of the game are as follows
#1 The pike now takes up 2 slots, instead of 1.
#2 The pike must be equipped at all times or it is dropped to the ground.
The purpose to these nerfs is to force players to specialize more and not be a swiss-army knife. While I support the idea of forcing players to choose what they need to rely on their teammates for, using both of these nerfs on the same item was a bad idea. Why?
Because either one of these nerfs by itself would have been sufficient to attain the goal of the patch.
If a pike takes up 2 slots, the player will be forced to pick between a real melee weapon, or be an archer/crossbower who is nearly completely unable to fend for themselves if they are cornered.
If you must equip the pike at all times, you are unable to lure a skilled cavalry player to attack a seemingly helpless person in the field. Additionally, by having the pike out at all times, you are forcing the piker to be very vulnerable to anyone who can facehug effectively, as well as having the piker exposed to any number of missile attacks.
The end result of each of these: a player who uses the pike is most likely going to be effective at killing a horse, but notably ineffective in many other situations. However, when you use both of these together, you have a player whose only strength is killing a horse.
If the piker is pressured in melee under the current system, the player has to drop their pike and draw out their melee weapon to fight off the opponent. Because most battles involve kiting and footwork, the player will, in most cases, be separated from their 2 slot weapon. Once this occurs, they are now much less effective at fighting off cavalry.
Cavalry had a counter, and the aforementioned counter was not considered by the greater crpg community to be overpowered. By adding BOTH of these nerfs to the pike, you have made the pike significantly less effective at doing its singular job. I strongly urge you to remove one of the two mentioned nerfs in this post, or, if my predictions are correct, the sheer number of cavalry characters will overwhelm crpg.
tl;dr version- By making the pike take up 2 slots, and forcing the player to drop the pike if they change weapons, pikers are now crippled against melee, archers, crossbowers, and throwers, thereby making pikers less common. This will in-turn make cavalry more powerful and more common.
Its not that cavalry have any sort of item or horse which is instant win, its that their main counter was overnerfed.
In this patch, the pike received a number of changes, including significant damage reduction on heirloomed versions of the weapon.
The nerfs that cause problems with the overall balance of the game are as follows
#1 The pike now takes up 2 slots, instead of 1.
#2 The pike must be equipped at all times or it is dropped to the ground.
The purpose to these nerfs is to force players to specialize more and not be a swiss-army knife. While I support the idea of forcing players to choose what they need to rely on their teammates for, using both of these nerfs on the same item was a bad idea. Why?
Because either one of these nerfs by itself would have been sufficient to attain the goal of the patch.
If a pike takes up 2 slots, the player will be forced to pick between a real melee weapon, or be an archer/crossbower who is nearly completely unable to fend for themselves if they are cornered.
If you must equip the pike at all times, you are unable to lure a skilled cavalry player to attack a seemingly helpless person in the field. Additionally, by having the pike out at all times, you are forcing the piker to be very vulnerable to anyone who can facehug effectively, as well as having the piker exposed to any number of missile attacks.
The end result of each of these: a player who uses the pike is most likely going to be effective at killing a horse, but notably ineffective in many other situations. However, when you use both of these together, you have a player whose only strength is killing a horse.
If the piker is pressured in melee under the current system, the player has to drop their pike and draw out their melee weapon to fight off the opponent. Because most battles involve kiting and footwork, the player will, in most cases, be separated from their 2 slot weapon. Once this occurs, they are now much less effective at fighting off cavalry.
Cavalry had a counter, and the aforementioned counter was not considered by the greater crpg community to be overpowered. By adding BOTH of these nerfs to the pike, you have made the pike significantly less effective at doing its singular job. I strongly urge you to remove one of the two mentioned nerfs in this post, or, if my predictions are correct, the sheer number of cavalry characters will overwhelm crpg.
tl;dr version- By making the pike take up 2 slots, and forcing the player to drop the pike if they change weapons, pikers are now crippled against melee, archers, crossbowers, and throwers, thereby making pikers less common. This will in-turn make cavalry more powerful and more common.
14
Game Balance Discussion / Redefining horses
« on: January 04, 2011, 06:11:13 pm »
Right now you have two kinds of horses
#1 Glass Cannons- High movement and maneuverability, piss poor life.
#2 Panzer-ponies- Also high movement speed, heavy armor, and stupidly high charge damage.
Right now, if you have a heavy horse, there is no reason why your KDR should be lower than 4 to 1 unless you have a terminal case of suckage. A horrible player can easily achieve god-like KDR with a panzer-pony.
I suggest a change in how we examine the roles of horses.
First off, the overall deciding factor of what horse to use should not just be "do I want ot grind up to 60k gold?" Each horse should be unique, have advantages and disadvantages, and should be desirable to different sets of players. What I suggest is not a buff for horses
My suggested changes
#1 freeby horse. No reqs. Slow, weak, no maneuverability. We shall call this "Taxi-horse." No character req commitment, but a horribly poor choice for combat. Designed to be utilized for getting from point A to Point B... much like my first car.
#2 Agile Horse. This would be the desert and sarranid horse. They would have around 110-120 life and 18-20 armor. A slight speed reduction and a noticeable charge damage reduction would be induced. Charge damage would be along the lines of 6-8 damage. Riding requirements would be 2-4
#3 Speed horses. Low Agility (38ish) High speed, 110-120 life, 15-20 armor. Very low charge damage (4-7.) Good for horse archers on an open plains, bad in a tight corner. Horse reqs 2-4.
#4 Medium horses. 140-160 life 25-35 armor, 15-20 charge damage. Medium-Low speed, Medium maneuverability. Can take a hit or two, but won't be able to dish out the charge damage that they currently do. Req 4-6
#5 Heavy cruisers. 110-120 life, 40-55 armor, High speed (46-49 ish) low maneuverability (37ish.) Riding reqs 4-6. Charge damage 15-18. The speedy horse for the dedicated horse rider. Can take arrows, but dies quickly to pikes. req 6
#6 Heavy Turners. 130 Life, 40-55 armor, 40-55 armor, High Maneuverability (46-49ish), low speed (38-40) Riding reqs 5-6. Charge damage 15-18. Designed for melee users on horseback. High armor, medium life, good turner. Great for weaving in and out of a cluster-F%#^. Riding requirement 6
#7 The Heavy. 160 life, 50-60 armor. 37 Speed, 40 maneuverability. Charge damage 20-25 Riding Req 10
#8 The "Durrrr" Tank. 150 life. 50 armor. 32 speed, 32 maneuverability, 35-40 charge damage. Riding Req 5-6. Best used with a glob of slobber creeping out of your half-opened mouth. Designed to appeal to the current cavalry "gods." Riding requirement 12
Additionally, if possible, I suggest a 10% exp penalty for players who have a horse equiped
The end result of the change would be this
#1 Horse charge damage would not be a player's primary way of damaging an opponent
-All the charge damage across the board has been reduced. This forces a player to rely on their skill rather than their "W" key.
#2 Arrows would take out most horses in 4-5 hits instead of the 1-3 for light horses and ??? for heavy.
-Pikes, throwing spears/lances, and crossbows would become the main threat to cavalry instead of arrows.
#3 Variety in horse choices on the field.
-Less monotoned than the battlefield currently is
#4 A steeper learning curve for cavalry.
-Less "Easy mode" applied for heavy horse users.
#1 Glass Cannons- High movement and maneuverability, piss poor life.
#2 Panzer-ponies- Also high movement speed, heavy armor, and stupidly high charge damage.
Right now, if you have a heavy horse, there is no reason why your KDR should be lower than 4 to 1 unless you have a terminal case of suckage. A horrible player can easily achieve god-like KDR with a panzer-pony.
I suggest a change in how we examine the roles of horses.
First off, the overall deciding factor of what horse to use should not just be "do I want ot grind up to 60k gold?" Each horse should be unique, have advantages and disadvantages, and should be desirable to different sets of players. What I suggest is not a buff for horses
My suggested changes
#1 freeby horse. No reqs. Slow, weak, no maneuverability. We shall call this "Taxi-horse." No character req commitment, but a horribly poor choice for combat. Designed to be utilized for getting from point A to Point B... much like my first car.
#2 Agile Horse. This would be the desert and sarranid horse. They would have around 110-120 life and 18-20 armor. A slight speed reduction and a noticeable charge damage reduction would be induced. Charge damage would be along the lines of 6-8 damage. Riding requirements would be 2-4
#3 Speed horses. Low Agility (38ish) High speed, 110-120 life, 15-20 armor. Very low charge damage (4-7.) Good for horse archers on an open plains, bad in a tight corner. Horse reqs 2-4.
#4 Medium horses. 140-160 life 25-35 armor, 15-20 charge damage. Medium-Low speed, Medium maneuverability. Can take a hit or two, but won't be able to dish out the charge damage that they currently do. Req 4-6
#5 Heavy cruisers. 110-120 life, 40-55 armor, High speed (46-49 ish) low maneuverability (37ish.) Riding reqs 4-6. Charge damage 15-18. The speedy horse for the dedicated horse rider. Can take arrows, but dies quickly to pikes. req 6
#6 Heavy Turners. 130 Life, 40-55 armor, 40-55 armor, High Maneuverability (46-49ish), low speed (38-40) Riding reqs 5-6. Charge damage 15-18. Designed for melee users on horseback. High armor, medium life, good turner. Great for weaving in and out of a cluster-F%#^. Riding requirement 6
#7 The Heavy. 160 life, 50-60 armor. 37 Speed, 40 maneuverability. Charge damage 20-25 Riding Req 10
#8 The "Durrrr" Tank. 150 life. 50 armor. 32 speed, 32 maneuverability, 35-40 charge damage. Riding Req 5-6. Best used with a glob of slobber creeping out of your half-opened mouth. Designed to appeal to the current cavalry "gods." Riding requirement 12
Additionally, if possible, I suggest a 10% exp penalty for players who have a horse equiped
The end result of the change would be this
#1 Horse charge damage would not be a player's primary way of damaging an opponent
-All the charge damage across the board has been reduced. This forces a player to rely on their skill rather than their "W" key.
#2 Arrows would take out most horses in 4-5 hits instead of the 1-3 for light horses and ??? for heavy.
-Pikes, throwing spears/lances, and crossbows would become the main threat to cavalry instead of arrows.
#3 Variety in horse choices on the field.
-Less monotoned than the battlefield currently is
#4 A steeper learning curve for cavalry.
-Less "Easy mode" applied for heavy horse users.
Pages: [1]