cRPG

cRPG => General Discussion => Topic started by: Alex_C on July 28, 2011, 04:55:48 pm

Title: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Alex_C on July 28, 2011, 04:55:48 pm
I've been playing cRPG on-and-off since the times when the server had to be restarted every half-hour; many things have changed since then, almost entirely for the better. I’ve just recently started playing again, after stopping playing in around November or December. Since then, there have been many patches, and a lot has changed. Back before I stopped playing, my main character was a two-hander without a shield, I can’t remember the exact stats as I’ve since over-written that character, but it had roughly balanced attributes and the like. My main now is a Skip The Fun character, with two sets of Heavy Throwing Axes, a Military Cleaver and a Heavy Round Shield; I also have relatively good armour, Ragged Outfit, Footman’s Helmet, Leather Gloves and Light Leather Boots. I also have a levelling alternate character, who uses a two-hander.

Levelling:

   The most major change is to levelling, with no more proximity-based experience and gold gain, everyone is able to gain experience and gold by merely being on the server; Skip The Fun characters mean that no one is forced to grind anymore. One result of this is that one sees far fewer peasants with just the default Straw Hat and Pitchfork on the battlefield, and it’s obvious why; within about half an hour, one can afford semi-decent equipment. Thus the process of levelling up from Level 1 to Level 20 is far less lengthy, painful and frustrating than it used to be. Conversely, due to upkeep and the like, one also sees far fewer of the invincible tin-cans on the battlefield, there probably used to be too many of them, but it did always give one a sense of satisfaction when they were brought down by a mob of lower-levels. Most players tend to be either just out of peasant-hood, or at the level which non-full time grinders used to reach. Another point is that even when someone reaches the ridiculously high levels, with multiple retirements and such, the effects of them being that high a level are reduced; whilst they are still far tougher to beat than a regular player, they are far from the god-like state which player such as Birdman, Oberyn, cmpxchg8b and other skillful high-levels used to be at.

Archers:

   When I used to play, I had to deal with archers like Birdman, who could be pin-point accurate across the map, whilst also being able to shoot several arrows a second, be able to kill in a single body-shot and being so fast as to be un-catchable by any but the fastest of Ninjas. Archers now still seem to have that ability to kite, and every single one of them does so. If one is trying to kill an archer, one has to prepare to chase them across the map, while they’re able to continually turn around and shoot at one. The new animation has however stopped their machine-gun rate of fire, however weird it may look. Equally, only the highest levelled archers now seem able to even approach the levels of damage which archers of old could inflict. Archers only seem to start approaching their old power-level when they are in groups; a single archer can not really do much to sway the tide of a battle, but a group of around seven archers is easily able to kill a group of infantry double that number, largely due to their ability to collectively kite and shoot the infantry whenever they attack one of their number. When archers are able to do so well however, it is also often due to the fact that the majority of infantry in cRPG have a strange hatred for shields, and will only ever use two-handers. Any one who only uses a two-hander in Battle mode really has no basis for complaining about ranged weapons; my shield character rarely even has to acknowledge the existence of archers.

Cavalry:

   Cavalry as a class has had some huge changes made to it; the first of these if I remember correctly was a large increase to horses’ charge damage, when this was first brought in, cavalry became relatively over-powered, due to their ability to charge recklessly through melee fights without a worry. However, the implementation of friendly horse-bumping has done a lot to balance the class, and indeed distinguish the team-playing, skillful cavalry from the reckless kill-chasers. When one has a good cavalry on one’s team, melee fights become much easier, when one has a poor cavalry on one’s team, one begins shying away from melee fights when they are coming near, treating them almost as enemy cavalry. One-handed cavalry seems now to be a far more viable class, with a relatively large number of them around, however I see fewer two-handed cavalry now than before. I feel that too many items have been declared unusable on horse-back, meaning that there is far less variety and far fewer interesting cavalry builds.

Throwing:

   Throwing at the moment is relatively well-balanced, although it is far more useful in a support role than in one-on-ones. Having someone - so long as they can aim and thus do not team-hit - throwing into a melee fight at short-distance can easily change the outcome of said fight. They have relatively high damage, even those players who seem to have stacked Iron Flesh and bought the best armour generally only take four or five throwing axes; their accuracy is enough to be able to hit most of the time at short to medium distances, and yet not to be sniping players. They are also an extremely effective counter to kiting archers, forcing them to either turn and fight, or run and be hit by throwing weapons. The fact that there are now fewer throwing weapons per weapon slot is a much-needed nerf, if my character were to have as many throwing axes as it would in Native, it would be significantly more powerful.

Sword&Board:

   In their current state, players who go one-hander and shield are under-powered, they are still relatively useful in a support capacity, by harrying the enemy whilst the more damaging, heavy-hitting two-handers or polearms kill them, and of course they offer protection against ranged weapons; however, in any kind of one-on-one, a shield-user is always far less powerful than a polearm-user or two-hander. When fighting two-handers, I find that the only successful tactic is to play extremely safely, only hitting when one has taken about three of their hits and are at kicking distance so one will actually be able to get a hit in, and even then one’s hit will generally bounce on their armour, meaning that they can continue to spam one. I don’t believe the problem of balance here lies with the shielders themselves, their stats are fine as they are, they shouldn’t need more speed, range or damage. The problem lies with the fact that the most popular two-handers in the game are hugely over-powered. The Danish and German Greatswords for instance are both ridiculously long and fast, and the only problems that two-handers face essentially comes from ranged weapons. In any kind of melee situation, two-handers always dominate. Even though shielders are useful in a support role, two-handers are better.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Blueberry Muffin on July 28, 2011, 05:11:50 pm
All good observations. Disagree with you on the shielder part. I could get plenty of kills when I was shielder not so long ago. Fighting 2handers with a 1h weapon is not so perilous as it seems. It just takes a little bit of patience and good timing.I could give Phyrex very good duels with my 1h weapon and if not match him toe to toe, give him a decent fight with plenty of strikes on him.(Bloody lordly armour :mad:) 3 two hander hits to 1 of your hits is untrue. Your own fault imo.

Apart from that you are right on the money i think. All classes seem perfectly balanced with a few little things, like giving lancers 10 degrees more to lance with(hardcoded i know) and a little nerf on the glaive. Oh and if anyone starts going on about how polearms are OP compared to 2h, I totally disagree. I have my polearmer main char and my 2h alt. I do just as well with my greratsword because I can do all little spins, lolstabs, hiltslashes and a variety of other tricks which are very hard to block in comparison to my slow and steady german poleaxe.

My thoughts  :)
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Dezilagel on July 28, 2011, 05:12:15 pm
Levelling:

Good obervations

Archers:

(mostly) Good observations

Cavalry:

Good observations

Throwing:

Good observations

Sword&Board:

Fucking bs, wtf



Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Baggy on July 28, 2011, 05:15:45 pm
Welcome back!Although i fail to see why ud make ur main a STF char.Also ur opinions on 1 handed seem to be off to say the least, a good 1 hander can beat the same skill 2 hander eg. Kinngrimm.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on July 28, 2011, 05:16:41 pm
Sorry but I do agree with the sword and board observation, as they are underpowered in that there are far fewer effective shielders then there are two handers or polearm users. Even the statistics gathered reflect this, both from the official ones released for the EU servers by Fasader and the ones that you can find elsewhere like www.nacrpg.net.

Anywho, Alex C. Mind if I use parts of this and/or link it to my guide? This was particularly well written.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: VVarlord on July 28, 2011, 05:17:12 pm
(click to show/hide)

Who are you sorry?
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on July 28, 2011, 05:18:47 pm
Who are you sorry?

It is a figure of speech from the southwest used when you disagree with someone. Like saying "No thank you" instead of saying "Thank you, but no" as "No thank you" means the same thing but at a glance sounds like "I am not even giving thanks."


"I'm sorry but ..." is a way of showing (and from habit due to speech around where I am at the moment) that you respectfully disagree with someone.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: VVarlord on July 28, 2011, 05:23:36 pm
Edited my post to be clear.

Really dont know.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Siiem on July 28, 2011, 05:27:09 pm
Who are you sorry?

Are you serious?
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: chadz on July 28, 2011, 05:27:17 pm
Edited my post to be clear.

I think you fail at being funny.

Twice.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Christo on July 28, 2011, 05:28:36 pm
Everything is spot-on, besides shielders.

I mean, underpowered? heck no. 2 of those damned lolskarl turtles facehug you and it's over.

Also, they have protection from ranged, don't have to manual block, get fast, and hard hitting, let alone derp weapons like the scimitar and the picks, etc.

And yeah, go to hell with the "omg 1h is short" crap. With a shield like Huscarl, the hell cares about length? They facehug 24/7 anyway.

So this "omg short range q_q" is even an advantage, because 1h has the tendency to headhit from all sides the most, from what I've experienced.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on July 28, 2011, 05:31:30 pm
I mean, underpowered? heck no. 2 of those damned lolskarl turtles facehug you and it's over.

Two against one? Ok...

Try being any melee footman, and fight one Danish Greatsword user and a Poleaxe user at the same time who stagger their attack timings so you can never get a strike in.

Same end result.

Alternatively, two archers against just you. Even if you have a shield, if and when they circle you, life gets interesting.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Christo on July 28, 2011, 05:33:59 pm
Two against one? Ok...

Try being any melee footman, and fight one Danish Greatsword user and a Poleaxe user at the same time who stagger their attack timings so you can never get a strike in.

Same end result.

Alternatively, two archers against just you. Even if you have a shield, if and when they circle you, life gets interesting.

At least against others, you have a decent chance. Even one huscarl spammer can give you a headache, just mentioned two of them because it's like you can stop moving, you're fucked anyway.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Cyclopsided on July 28, 2011, 05:34:41 pm
Tears, that is all 2 on 1 fights.

But honestly, +1 to this thread. Best stealth 1h+shield lobby I've ever seen.
TBH shielders are powerful in 1v1, they aren't underpowered. If I didn't enjoy manual blocking so much, I'd play my shielders more since I influence victory more with them.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on July 28, 2011, 05:36:52 pm
Tears, that is all 2 on 1 fights.

That was exactly my entire point.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Inporylem on July 28, 2011, 05:38:33 pm
their ability to charge recklessly through melee fights without a worry

I liked this part
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Alex_C on July 28, 2011, 05:53:36 pm
All good observations. Disagree with you on the shielder part. I could get plenty of kills when I was shielder not so long ago. Fighting 2handers with a 1h weapon is not so perilous as it seems. It just takes a little bit of patience and good timing.I could give Phyrex very good duels with my 1h weapon and if not match him toe to toe, give him a decent fight with plenty of strikes on him.(Bloody lordly armour :mad:) 3 two hander hits to 1 of your hits is untrue. Your own fault imo.

This may well be a problem with my build, or indeed a problem with being too used to Native combat mechanics, however against most two-handers who use either of those twenty-foot long light-sabers, they are able to spam me with most hits, not due to my being stunned, or indeed due to a lack of good timing on my part, or any other of the plethora of explanations offered to players new to the game.

<constructivecriticism>

Thanks.

Welcome back!Although i fail to see why ud make ur main a STF char.Also ur opinions on 1 handed seem to be off to say the least, a good 1 hander can beat the same skill 2 hander eg. Kinngrimm.

Mainly because I don't particularly like grinding, and want to have an okay character for Strategus. The thing is, I don't think it's an to do with the shield, more to do with the one-handers themselves. Once my shield has been broken, and I'm fighting a two-hander, I still need to block at least three times in order to get anywhere near them, and my hits still consistently bounce against their armour. Any kind of feinting on my side is pointless, as they'll just spam through it; holds are useful to a point, for buying time; chambers are utterly pointless since they'll always be able to dodge them.

Anywho, Alex C. Mind if I use parts of this and/or link it to my guide? This was particularly well written.

Not at all, and thanks.

Who are you sorry?

Eh, I could ask the same of you to be honest. Don't recall ever playing with you.

I mean, underpowered? heck no. 2 of those damned lolskarl turtles facehug you and it's over.

Err... two competent members of most classes against you and you're probably dead as well.

Also, they have protection from ranged, don't have to manual block, get fast, and hard hitting, let alone derp weapons like the scimitar and the picks, etc.

Protection from ranged is a biggy, fair enough. Not having to manual block isn't, it's not like manual blocking's hard. I've seen far fewer silly one-handers than I have silly two-handers. =p

And yeah, go to hell with the "omg 1h is short" crap. With a shield like Huscarl, the hell cares about length? They facehug 24/7 anyway.

So this "omg short range q_q" is even an advantage, because 1h has the tendency to headhit from all sides the most, from what I've experienced.

I already said that the problem with one-handers lies not in their being underpowered, but in two-handers being over-powered.

But honestly, +1 to this thread. Best stealth 1h+shield lobby I've ever seen.
TBH shielders are powerful in 1v1, they aren't underpowered. If I didn't enjoy manual blocking so much, I'd play my shielders more since I influence victory more with them.

Not really stealth, anything I've tried to point out is written quite clearly there. I see one-handers as being relatively under-powered in most circumstances, thus I wrote that.

Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Turkhammer on July 28, 2011, 06:15:44 pm
A well thought out and well written post Alexander.

I agree with all the points you made.  I think the real problem is that 2h and polearms can be swung too quickly and with too many repetitions.  Pole arms or heavy hammers/swords should not be able to swing with the same speed as a 1h weapon.  Pole arms were meant to be used en-masse against horses and mounted knights.  They were not used in 1 on 1 combat as most often happens in the game.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Laufknoten on July 28, 2011, 06:27:59 pm
If you use the right equipment and have some skill with 1h+shield it's an extremly deadly class. You won't get ridiculous scores like MW great sword-swingers do, but you can play an essential role in battle and be one of the top players. The price is more upkeep, the range disadvantage and the bouncing, even with 6+ PS. Besides that it's lot of fun to play this class. 
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on July 28, 2011, 06:48:12 pm
If you use the right equipment and have some skill with 1h+shield it's an extremly deadly class. You won't get ridiculous scores like MW great sword-swingers do, but you can play an essential role in battle and be one of the top players. The price is more upkeep, the range disadvantage and the bouncing, even with 6+ PS. Besides that it's lot of fun to play this class.

That is kind of his point, it can still be an extremely deadly class, but then why do 2 handers and polearms perform even better at a very noticeable rate?
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Kato on July 28, 2011, 06:56:42 pm
For me (average player) are very good 1h far more scary than very good 2h when i meet them on battlefield. I was turtle 1 generation and after few hours on duel server it was easy mod(3:1 kd ratio on level 30 regulary).
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Laufknoten on July 28, 2011, 07:39:12 pm
That is kind of his point, it can still be an extremely deadly class, but then why do 2 handers and polearms perform even better at a very noticeable rate?
Well, with a 2h sword you need 2 or 3 hits to kill most people, with a 1h sword you need up to 10+ hits for a heavy armored opponent, with MW Spamitar or axes it's a little less work though. So when you kill one enemy, someone with a MW Danish can kill 3 or 4 people in the same time, just because he has a higher killspeed. 
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Christo on July 28, 2011, 07:39:50 pm
Well, with a 2h sword you need 2 or 3 hits to kill most people, with a 1h sword you need up to 10+ hits for a heavy armored opponent, with MW Spamitar or axes it's a little less work though. So when you kill one enemy, someone with a MW Danish can kill 3 or 4 people in the same time, just because he has a higher killspeed.

Exaggerating a bit?
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Baggy on July 28, 2011, 07:46:17 pm
Exaggerating a bit?
Yes he is, unless his build is 9/30 or something like that.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Delro on July 28, 2011, 07:48:11 pm
Heavy Warhammer kills platers in about 2 hits. If the first hit scores a knockdown, it's over.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Christo on July 28, 2011, 07:48:36 pm
Yes he is, unless his build is 9/30 or something like that.

Yep, usually I can go down from 2 or 3 1hander hits. Dunno what this guy is talking about.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Laufknoten on July 28, 2011, 08:13:10 pm
Yes he is, unless his build is 9/30 or something like that.
18 STR, 6 PS, 128 wfp, weapon is side sword. I didn't say it happens always, but with a non-heirloomed sword with "low" cutting damage it can happen against transitional or higher. 
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Spawny on July 28, 2011, 08:16:07 pm
For me (average player) are very good 1h far more scary than very good 2h when i meet them on battlefield. I was turtle 1 generation and after few hours on duel server it was easy mod(3:1 kd ratio on level 30 regulary).

Depends on who you duel.

When I go to the duelserver, I often sport a very negative kd ratio. Mostly because I only duel people better than I am and I won't stop until I've beaten them at least once.

Anyway, recently respecced into my trusty class the 1h/shielder again and for me it's about equal to 2h/pole. I have no trouble dueling 2h/pole, there's just a few important rules to follow.
The most important:
When a 2h does his right to left swing, they will follow up with a left to right swing while running past you on your right side. DO NOT TRY TO ATTACK, you will get hit first. In that case, you have to block twice and then you can counter attack.

Anyway, the part in your observations I didn't agree with was the thrower part.
It can take well over 5 axes to kill someone depending on their armour and the higher tier throwing weapons are in too short supply compared to the amount needed to kill a man.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Baggy on July 28, 2011, 08:17:36 pm
18 STR, 6 PS, 128 wfp, weapon is side sword. I didn't say it happens always, but with a non-heirloomed sword with "low" cutting damage it can happen against transitional or higher. 
Your using a side sword what do you expect, you trade dmg for speed.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Murmillus_Prime on July 28, 2011, 08:22:01 pm
I've been playing cRPG on-and-off since the times when the server had to be restarted every half-hour; many things have changed since then, almost entirely for the better. I’ve just recently started playing again, after stopping playing in around November or December. Since then, there have been many patches, and a lot has changed. Back before I stopped playing, my main character was a two-hander without a shield, I can’t remember the exact stats as I’ve since over-written that character, but it had roughly balanced attributes and the like. My main now is a Skip The Fun character, with two sets of Heavy Throwing Axes, a Military Cleaver and a Heavy Round Shield; I also have relatively good armour, Ragged Outfit, Footman’s Helmet, Leather Gloves and Light Leather Boots. I also have a levelling alternate character, who uses a two-hander.

Levelling:

Yes

Archers:

   Yes

Cavalry:

   No

Throwing:

   Yes

Sword&Board:

   No
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Magikarp on July 28, 2011, 08:23:04 pm
I take 3 hits in general to kill most people with my elite scimi.

I'd say I agree on 2hander cav being less good, but it's because of the stats, not because a lack of variety in weapons.

No opinion on lancer cav at all? And polearms?
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Laufknoten on July 28, 2011, 08:28:07 pm
Your using a side sword what do you expect, you trade dmg for speed.
And thrust damage. :D I was talking about swings, not stabs. Stab is deadly against heavy armor, but you can't stab everyone all the time with a sword (cause it's kinda easy to block), so you still have to swing a lot. 
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Zoidberg on July 28, 2011, 08:33:38 pm
BTW:Welcome back Alex!
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: VVarlord on July 28, 2011, 08:42:08 pm
Wasnt trying to be funny and genuinely dont know who alex is.  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on July 28, 2011, 08:42:42 pm
Wasnt trying to be funny and genuinely dont know who alex is.  :rolleyes:

He is the I.S.P.C.A. President.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: VVarlord on July 28, 2011, 08:44:44 pm
He is the I.S.P.C.A. President.

.....   :cry:
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Alex_C on July 29, 2011, 12:00:58 am
I'd say I agree on 2hander cav being less good, but it's because of the stats, not because a lack of variety in weapons.

I don't know much about the stats, or what it's like to play as two-hander cavalry these days. I had a Morningstar and Courser (or whatever it's called now) build a very long time ago, but I'd imagine it's very different now.

My comment about the variety of weapons available wasn't really about balance, more just that it's a pity that one really doesn't see that many different 'types' of cavalry around these days.

No opinion on lancer cav at all? And polearms?

I really like what's been done with the dropping of lances (I believe this applies to pikes as well?) when one changes away from them, as it means that lance cavalry can't easily have a back-up sword or the like to use from horseback. Lancers seem to be becoming more and more what they should be in my opinion, cavalry used to tackle other cavalry, and the anti-footman work is being left for one-handers, or two-handers. From what I've seen of them, they seem pretty balanced in their current state, although I've never played as a lancer in cRPG, so I might not be the best person to ask.

Polearms in general seem like a watered-down version of two-handers, with the same disadvantages, but not really with so many advantages. Pikes however seem like a far more viable class than they've ever been before (and possibly too viable). I remember [ptx] being one of the few pikemen around, and he was forced most of the time to use the awlpike, and even then in one-on-one fights, he was at a severe disadvantage. Now it seems that anyone can grab one of the longer pikes, and use it without too many problems in both one-on-ones and as a support weapon. From what I've seen, this seems mostly to be a problem with their speed, although it could be something else.

BTW:Welcome back Alex!

Thanks!

Wasnt trying to be funny and genuinely dont know who alex is.  :rolleyes:

And I don't really know who VVarlord is, must have come from different eras of cRPG.

He is the I.S.P.C.A. President.

          __
         │〓.│
      ━━━━━
      ミ ´_>`)
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Magikarp on July 29, 2011, 12:07:46 am
Was just curious since I remember you using the Glaive a lot, along with Sawa. Welcome back mate, if you plan on playing.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: BD_SUPERBEAST on July 29, 2011, 01:10:02 am
Welcome back again!!!   :D :D
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: DrKronic on July 29, 2011, 01:19:51 am
biased, I like how you say

"as a shielder you don't even worry about archers" and "2handers have no place on battle" "1hers are too weak against 2h's"

=derp, why not recoginze the advantage vs ranged 1hers have, that means something, not just oh we're immune to archers but NO FAIR can't kill 2hs (while also acknowledging 2h's get slaughtered by archers)

lol
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Alex_C on July 29, 2011, 01:42:49 am
Was just curious since I remember you using the Glaive a lot, along with Sawa. Welcome back mate, if you plan on playing.

Ah yah, good ol' Sawa. =3

Welcome back again!!!   :D :D

Thanks. =D

biased, I like how you say

"as a shielder you don't even worry about archers" and "2handers have no place on battle" "1hers are too weak against 2h's"

=derp, why not recoginze the advantage vs ranged 1hers have, that means something, not just oh we're immune to archers but NO FAIR can't kill 2hs (while also acknowledging 2h's get slaughtered by archers)

lol

I like how you say

"All 1her users should be banned"
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: jspook on July 29, 2011, 02:16:40 am
First off,
there is a lot of whining going on in this thread that should probably just be posted Here (http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,11950.msg168636.html#msg168636) instead.

Second,
The scoreboard should NOT and will never be an indicator of whether or not certain classes are Balanced.  Every class in this game has a very distinct role to play.  For example:

(click to show/hide)

there are many many variations, and everyone has a role to play.  But just because you see 2H or Pole at the top a lot, does not mean that the class is not balanced.  There are a lot of variables that have to be taken into account about the makeup of each team, and how willing the other classes are in participating in face to face combat.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Kalam on July 29, 2011, 02:32:25 am
I think the game is as balanced as it's ever been. As a one-hander, I believe I contribute to the battle in other ways other than racking up kills. You've got to view it as a support class, honestly, though the strength shielder can be quite deadly if he's used to the nuances of fighting with a shield. I've always had timing issues using a shield compared to manual blocking, but I'm sure it's merely a matter of what you're most comfortable doing.

Soaking up hits for your big strength two-hander/polearm friend is always useful, as is forcing the enemy team to look at you when it's your team mates they should be worried about.

As the poster above wisely indicated, a lot of it is about team composition. Despite the fact that two-handers do a lot of killing in standard cRPG battles, I believe they're currently the most useless class in organized scrims. Give me a team of shielders, polearm users, and crossbowmen and I'd be one happy player.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Classical on July 29, 2011, 02:57:21 am
:words:

You forgot something, and with community being in large part a major aspect of multiplayer development with any due course of a game designed for "multiple players" on at a simultaneous point, especially one that relies on the emphasis of forming player factions to vie and control a database based battlefield, in comparison to the original single player. So let's continue, because this will be the last time I'm ever going to rant about this, after about five hours today already gone.

Community:
The state of this modifications community development is hardly noticeable if not, non-existent. The lead developer and the founder of the modification "chadz", shows absolute neglect towards communal development aspects of the said mod. The modification, being based as an online modification and made for the use of multiple people, and sole purpose of offering progression in the multiplayer matches in M&B:WB will attract players to it being the veteran or first of it's kind. People flocked to this game and formed a community like a scab forms around a cut or scrape. This community formed entirely by the ideals that people would simply adapt and flock to the modification, and was assumed due to the fact players are needed to continue development and test development cycles at all within the modification. The summary of the paragraph can be condensed into: this mod is not developed for you, it's developed for the developer. That statement alone can easily show lack of communal development, complete apathy for said development, or even the ideals of not caring, even though community development in any online game that builds more than one players into groups or factions is needed and almost required for succession of the mod and further development into new and bold territories.

We can say boldly that this mod is not developed "professionally", but with the amount of time gone into the coding scripting, graphical designs, web design and mastery, and basic database/server maintenance, this mod is being developed. As a child I had to learn my ABC's and learn them well, from here I progressed to spelling words, and the like, basic logic. Just as a multiplayer game must form a community to continue development, it must manage it, form it, shape it, maintain it, and continue. The state of this current community is an unmoderated wasteland, kept far from the reaches and eyes of the lead developer due to the fact of complete and total indifference and apathy on the subject. Currently the state of the community is divided into two sectors: European, and North American.

The European community was the first formed and is the native of the lead developer, it received the most attention basically due to the fact it formed fastest, and first and foremost it was first. This is assumed on my part, history does not concern me, you can clearly tell that the formation of the European community received favoritism later in it's lifespan as the North American community joined in at a later or similar date, due to the native land of our apathetic said lead developer: "chadz". The European community has developed, and been semi-developed well and been watched and worked with by multiple developers on multiple innings and cycles of this mods lifespan. If there was any sign of community management, it would be the EU community, stable, and still standing, we have the EU community.

The North American community is a joke, it formed like said earlier, "Like a scab forms around a cut or scrape", it just formed. It received massive neglect and complete indifference and some dislike from the development team, in fact one of the developers shows irrational and illogical dislike towards management of the North American community. The history of the North American community, I am not clear on and will not attempt to reciprocate the history in anyway due to the communities founding members showing strong signs of arrogance for "what they did", which was simply exist. Currently, after almost a year of development the North American community recieved it's first set of "Official Servers". What this term means is that chadz will recieve less dramatic posts and threads directed towards him about the North American community, and he can resume his development and continue full neglect and apathy towards the NA side of the commmunity the community has a set of servers that is officially endorsed and run by the lead developers, development team, despite it taking an unknown member of the community with a particularly bad reputation to even make the offer of hosting these servers as any future effort put into hosting official servers for this side of the community was not an option. However, it's clear (And confirmed) that this was just some sort of social play to decrease tensions between the North American community and the European community, and settle down any dramatic happenings that would have been caused by the community. The NA community still remains in a state of neglect, disarray, and once again for the tenth time: total apathy.

For all intensive purposes the community development of this game is terrible, the North American sector development is even worse, despite how easy it is to manage and figure out, it probably would cause mass labour to attempt repairs on the state of the community. In all honesty the neglect, indifference, and lack of any care for the community development aspects of this mod is truly pathetic.

The too long didn't read aspects of this thread are basically: chadz developed this mod for himself, you're just along for the ride.

As a personal statement from me, inching away from logic and rationale for one second I have to say, truly I hope your not a community manager if you ever take that job at TaleWorlds "chadz".

This is my take on the community aspects in the "State of cRPG", and this is my giving my honest, drunk, opinion.

P.S. I don't want to be friends.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Classical on July 29, 2011, 03:46:18 am
In other news, Goons ruin legitimate discussion and bad developers who neglect everything community related keep going on their not-caring ways!

Apathy is our word of the day.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Topsnus on July 29, 2011, 04:05:27 am
1h and shield has always been at a disadvantage to 2h. To all who think it is easy, change to 1h, i am a 1h and i think it is far easier to fight other 1h than 2h. Because with a 1 hander, if worst comes to worst, you can usually break their shield and then kill them.

I also think it is kinda unfair how they made the mauls and poleaxes and whatnot. A poleaxe can break a shield in like 3-4 hits, and then the 1h is at a all around disadvantage. And some of the maul builds are nearly impossible to beat without an agility 1h build, which does take a rediculous amount of hits to kill.

What i don't understand is why we need to include weapons in this game for 2h to beat "turtles." If someone is legitly "turtling," spam their shield, then when it breaks, kill them. Turtling gives no advantage to the turtle. I believe the problem lies in 2h becoming angry if it takes them more than 6 seconds to get a kill. Try being a 1h, where it is very difficult to feint, you do very low damage, your attacks are often blocked by unbreakable swords, while your shield deteriorates, etc. A 1h killing a 2h takes about as much time as a 2h killing a "turtling" 1h. So i don't understand why we have to have special weapons to increase the speed at which a 2h beats a 1h.

Also, 1h have a VERY hard time with cavalry, who i personally feel are a little too powerful, which might be because im a 1h, and cavalry literally HAVE to screw up for a 1h to beat a horse. A skilled horseman CANNOT lose to a 1h and shield, while they can easily lose to a 2h or polearm.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: MrShine on July 29, 2011, 06:30:41 am
I haven't been around from the start so I missed some of the really imbalanced days.

Game seems pretty good right now as far as balance goes.

As others mentioned I agree with most of what the OP said except for 1h/shield, which I think is very strong.  I generally find 2-h fights to be pretty easy.  Depends on the player ofc, but as long as you keep good footwork I feel that the advantage is with the 1h/shielder since you get so many 'free' blocks.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Ozwan on July 29, 2011, 07:12:24 am
Finally some good thread from someone who hasnt joined cRPG a month ago or so.

About shielders: even though I'm currently playing as one I dont think they need any fixes really. The thing is that shielder, I think, isn't at all a 1v1 type of character, it's underpowered in those situations. What he excels at is area and possible movement denial and creating massive pressure in group fights while remaining totally invulnerable (except hammers) for long period of time unless he decides to strike. In short, he's meant to work in a group and overcome enemy by superior positioning and timing, not to try to fight 2h/poles as equal on their terms.

The one thing that annoys me absolutely are glances. One-handers deliver such low damage usually that the hits simply glance off even while hitting foes in medium armor, not to mention heavy or heirloomed. And it usually has fatal consequences.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Gorath on July 29, 2011, 07:29:22 am
The one thing that annoys me absolutely are glances. One-handers deliver such low damage usually that the hits simply glance off even while hitting foes in medium armor, not to mention heavy or heirloomed. And it usually has fatal consequences.

^
Agreed (with your whole post actually, especially shielders being team-based support characters- balb and manofwar notwithstanding).  Truly about the only thing that is rather stupid with shielders is the glancing issue, even after the armor changes.  The part of it that bugs me isn't so much the glancing from terrible positioning but that it's more effective to face-hug with a 2her or polearm than a 1her because the 1her will glance while the 2her either hits the feet, hiltslashes or hits the head at point blank range for full damage.  Polearms as well.  Everyone has dealth with point blank lol-spinstabs from both 2hers and polearms (and I abuse the hell out of them myself).
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Lansamur on July 29, 2011, 07:32:25 am

Sword&Board:

   In their current state, players who go one-hander and shield are under-powered, they are still relatively useful in a support capacity, by harrying the enemy whilst the more damaging, heavy-hitting two-handers or polearms kill them, and of course they offer protection against ranged weapons; however, in any kind of one-on-one, a shield-user is always far less powerful than a polearm-user or two-hander. When fighting two-handers, I find that the only successful tactic is to play extremely safely, only hitting when one has taken about three of their hits and are at kicking distance so one will actually be able to get a hit in, and even then one’s hit will generally bounce on their armour, meaning that they can continue to spam one. I don’t believe the problem of balance here lies with the shielders themselves, their stats are fine as they are, they shouldn’t need more speed, range or damage. The problem lies with the fact that the most popular two-handers in the game are hugely over-powered. The Danish and German Greatswords for instance are both ridiculously long and fast, and the only problems that two-handers face essentially comes from ranged weapons. In any kind of melee situation, two-handers always dominate. Even though shielders are useful in a support role, two-handers are better.

Well, I've been playing 1h/board almost all the time. I disagree with them being underpowered if you play them aggressively and with a corresponding build. I usually pick 24/15, 8PS and 5 Shield, Ath and WM. I can 3-4 hitkill platers if I get a shot at their head. They need about the same for me when they're polearmer or 2her and I'm in my Lordly Transitional.

At the moment, I think cRPG seems quite balanced, except archers being underpowered in their damage-output.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: DrKronic on July 29, 2011, 07:47:56 am
can someone give me a one sentence summary of the ragewall, he lost me at the picture of the guy from NAKED GUN
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Espu on July 29, 2011, 11:29:59 am
Cleaned the useless spamming from the thread. Some people had better learn that when they have nothing to say on the subject, posting in the thread is not necessary.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Rangerbob on July 29, 2011, 05:02:57 pm
I polearm build and a I can say shielders annoy me more than anything else in group fights.  Good shielders know that they shouldn't go for counter attacks when theres other 2 handers around.  They just stay around my right or left swing with their shield raised and I have a terrible time trying to counterattack other shielders/2 handers.  If I lose my concentration and swing into their shield its over.   Facing 2 sheilders at a time is why I have good agi so I can look for easier targets.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Corrado_Decimo on July 29, 2011, 05:29:59 pm
Sorry but I do agree with the sword and board observation, as they are underpowered in that there are far fewer effective shielders then there are two handers or polearm users. Even the statistics gathered reflect this, both from the official ones released for the EU servers by Fasader and the ones that you can find elsewhere like www.nacrpg.net.

i disagree about the shielders part. good teamplay minded shielders (even if not so deadly like pompom, LoR, kinngrimm) will make a team win (especially in siege). bad shielders will try to go for kills leaving the main line vulnerable to ranged (the one maybe that want to have a good position in the quoted reply's statistics page)

Tears, measuring a build value with the k/d ratio or streak kills is wrong. (because the k/d ratio only see the deathblows... not the overall damage done.)

shielders are not meant to go in the mess and kill stuff. they're meant to advance under ranged fire, give ranged cover,advance and make space for damage troops.

and EVEN this way, aggressive shielders (mtemko, LoR, Tot, akingibegi, cyber, etc etc) will still have that good k/d ratio you seems to put above all.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Corrado_Decimo on July 29, 2011, 05:31:47 pm
Well, I've been playing 1h/board almost all the time. I disagree with them being underpowered if you play them aggressively and with a corresponding build. I usually pick 24/15, 8PS and 5 Shield, Ath and WM. I can 3-4 hitkill platers if I get a shot at their head. They need about the same for me when they're polearmer or 2her and I'm in my Lordly Transitional.

At the moment, I think cRPG seems quite balanced, except archers being underpowered in their damage-output.

lansamur, i got 1hit by some headcuts by cleaver and steelpicks even with a 50 armor helmet and 70 hp. just to say.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Corrado_Decimo on July 29, 2011, 05:36:04 pm
1h and shield has always been at a disadvantage to 2h. To all who think it is easy, change to 1h, i am a 1h and i think it is far easier to fight other 1h than 2h. Because with a 1 hander, if worst comes to worst, you can usually break their shield and then kill them.

I also think it is kinda unfair how they made the mauls and poleaxes and whatnot. A poleaxe can break a shield in like 3-4 hits, and then the 1h is at a all around disadvantage. And some of the maul builds are nearly impossible to beat without an agility 1h build, which does take a rediculous amount of hits to kill.

What i don't understand is why we need to include weapons in this game for 2h to beat "turtles." If someone is legitly "turtling," spam their shield, then when it breaks, kill them. Turtling gives no advantage to the turtle. I believe the problem lies in 2h becoming angry if it takes them more than 6 seconds to get a kill. Try being a 1h, where it is very difficult to feint, you do very low damage, your attacks are often blocked by unbreakable swords, while your shield deteriorates, etc. A 1h killing a 2h takes about as much time as a 2h killing a "turtling" 1h. So i don't understand why we have to have special weapons to increase the speed at which a 2h beats a 1h.

Also, 1h have a VERY hard time with cavalry, who i personally feel are a little too powerful, which might be because im a 1h, and cavalry literally HAVE to screw up for a 1h to beat a horse. A skilled horseman CANNOT lose to a 1h and shield, while they can easily lose to a 2h or polearm.

well if in your team you 1handed/shield go chase and suicide against a polearm or 2h, you will not really help your team. you will tho if you make your DPS troops advance under arrows rain and going to form with the team on a better place.

just try to make a random plains battle with all 2h/polearm in one team and a mixed shielders/2h/polearm/cav/ranged in the other. you'll see the 2h/polearm team being killed round by round.

EDIT:

My God man, learn to edit your posts!

did i done it right?
and ofc... learn to not go offtopic too much

My God man, learn to edit your posts!
I am perfectly aware of that, but it is the standard that most people use.
My main is an archer, trust me, I know that maintaining a good K/D ratio is not important seeing as my primary targets are horses which don't show up at all.

weird. you use it to support your opinions though. even when arguing about a teamplay build that last thing it needs to do is to create more kill hunters.

is like saying how a car is good only measuring the top speed.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on July 29, 2011, 05:55:22 pm
My God man, learn to edit your posts!
Tears, measuring a build value with the k/d ratio or streak kills is wrong. (because the k/d ratio only see the deathblows... not the overall damage done.)

I am perfectly aware of that, but it is the standard that most people use.
My main is an archer, trust me, I know that maintaining a good K/D ratio is not important seeing as my primary targets are horses which don't show up at all.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: San on July 29, 2011, 06:01:03 pm
Finally read all the responses in this thread.

Well thought out post. I think in terms of strategus, a lot of the standard builds are just fine.

1h+shield are less powerful, but I think it's supposed to be that way. I just wish the shield slowed us down less, then we'd actually be able to chase archers better and be able to help better in a 2v1 situation (I have since switched to an awlpike + shield since I'm too slow/weapon too short to help my teammate much in 2v1).

Then there's the weird bad angle hits when facehugging, I've gotten so many free hits on 1h users because of that, just because I was a little close.

I fear 1h+shield users far less, since they can't chase me as well, even in a 2-3v1, while 2h/polearm can hit me from far away. It's easier to single out a 1her easier. Even if my shield breaks first, that just makes me faster than them, so I can just outfeint and circle them.

With 8 IF and 27 strength, after recently upgrading to higher end armor, I can take 4-6 hits from 1hs if a few of them are bad angles.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Kafein on July 29, 2011, 07:20:03 pm
Shielders aren't meant to be star players, although there ARE shielder star players and people already mentioned them here.

However, most top k/d shielders are aggressive shielders, with small shields, fast and hard-hitting builds, attacking and finding themselves alone vs multiple opponents very often, and usually winning those 1vs2 and 1vs3 fights because they know how to use their shield and block multiple attacks at the same time. To use their advantage to full extent, top shielders try to find 2 or 3 opponents they can safely engage and defeat.


The most common type of shielder is the defending, teamplay oriented, heavy shielder with large shield, that forms up shieldwalls, protects pikes and ranged, covers 2h and polearms, blocks enemies, is first on ladders etc. That way of playing is probably just as effective for the team given the same skill, but is clearly not as rewarding in terms of k/d.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Turkhammer on July 29, 2011, 07:43:38 pm
Well, I've been playing 1h/board almost all the time. I disagree with them being underpowered if you play them aggressively and with a corresponding build. I usually pick 24/15, 8PS and 5 Shield, Ath and WM. I can 3-4 hitkill platers if I get a shot at their head. They need about the same for me when they're polearmer or 2her and I'm in my Lordly Transitional.

At the moment, I think cRPG seems quite balanced, except archers being underpowered in their damage-output.

How do you get 24/15 strength/agi?  What level is that?  I have 18/18 at level 30, gen 1.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Corrado_Decimo on July 29, 2011, 07:49:09 pm
How do you get 24/15 strength/agi?  What level is that?  I have 18/18 at level 30, gen 1.

converting skill points.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Murmillus_Prime on July 29, 2011, 08:14:54 pm
How do you get 24/15 strength/agi?  What level is that?  I have 18/18 at level 30, gen 1.

Many people sacrifice iron flesh to convert to attribute points, many players don't even add a single IF. I'm a more traditional player and prefer having decent IF, although it doesn't help much when facing the full damage of a 2h/pole head-shot, it is noticeable when you end up surviving a round with 4 arrows and a throwing axe stuck in your armour.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Lansamur on July 29, 2011, 08:16:26 pm
24/15 on lvl 30

8PS
5 Ath, Shield, WM
8 Converted
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on July 29, 2011, 08:24:55 pm
Hm, I myself find that 24/15 worked best for my poelarm builds, as for shielders I prefer 21.15 for the extra survivability, or just going the extra mile and making a 27/12 for offensive no holding the line kind of shielder.
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Osiris on July 29, 2011, 08:26:10 pm
i prefer 21/18 7ps 6ath 6wm and 4 if :P
Title: Re: Observations Regarding the Current State of cRPG
Post by: Corrado_Decimo on July 29, 2011, 09:22:10 pm
i prefer 21/18 7ps 6ath 6wm and 4 if :P

well me too... but they're talking about shielders  :P. so 21/18 will have 4shields instead 4if. or 4ath 6shields (imo better for shielders).
also IF works best when wearing heavy armor. with light-medium armor, imo IF is not worth and those points could be converted for a 1 more powerstrike or WM.

about the extreme attribute builds (i like them), this is not bad for a STR 2handed. strength compensate the lack of IF. 69hp give survivability if wearing heavy armor:

Level 31 (8 892 403 xp)

    Strength: 30
    Agility: 12
    Hit points: 69

    Skills to attributes: 12

    Ironflesh: 2
    Power Strike: 10
    Shield: 0
    Athletics: 4
    Riding: 0
    Horse Archery: 0
    Power Draw: 0
    Power Throw: 0
    Weapon Master: 4

    One Handed: 1
    Two Handed: 141
    Polearm: 1
    Archery: 1
    Crossbow: 1
    Throwing: 1

sorry for the OT