cRPG

cRPG => General Discussion => Topic started by: Nurax on December 14, 2011, 03:08:12 pm

Title: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Nurax on December 14, 2011, 03:08:12 pm
Classic cRPG vs New cRPG
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Oberyn on December 14, 2011, 03:08:40 pm
There's a whole thread about this already.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Vibe on December 14, 2011, 03:17:03 pm
New
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Vexus on December 14, 2011, 03:18:00 pm
Classic with new balances?
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Teeth on December 14, 2011, 03:22:47 pm
New with some rethinking, not against taking some elements of the old.

Or old with a full wipe every two months.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: dodnet on December 14, 2011, 03:57:32 pm
Can you point out some of the differences for players who aren't in cRPG since ancient times?  :wink:
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: B3RS3RK on December 14, 2011, 04:00:48 pm
Classic cRPG with tweaks.

Meaning Ways to make Plate more unattractive to wear all the time(Severe movement disadvantages or something).

And everything upped in Price by 50%(Weapons and armors)

Riding back to 1 per 5 Agi

Leveling back to the old System, but Softcap at 30 like now.

And stuff like that.


Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Horns_Archive on December 14, 2011, 04:04:13 pm
Not many people were here for old, someone betterdescribe
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: B3RS3RK on December 14, 2011, 04:15:08 pm
In the glorious days of old cRPG, levelling to level 30 was much harder(eg more xp needed).

You bought weapons and armors only ONCE, then you kept it forever and never lost it and didnt need to pay upkeep for it.

Of course making Money was much harder back then.You got about 200 -300 gold for a good round(Depending on where you start in Classic cRPG history).Gold was earned by staying close to battle.You got gold and exp for every kill you stood close to(Every kill your team made).

At first, you couldnt retire at all, but when chadz implemented it, you could retire the first time at level 15(Or 16?I dont know anymore)and needed to pay 5000.Each generation you needed one level more and 5000 gold more to retire.

You got a loompoint by retiring AND some per cent of your WPF carried over to the next gen(This was heavily abused by some, the most famous being Kesh with his Legolas pewpew Ubermadness).

1 Riding needed 5(or 6?) Agi back then, making Plated Charger Plate Armor knights difficult to reach because you needed a very high level.


Thats basically the cRPG pre-upkeep patch.

Farther back, there were even more things, like no weight based WPF and speed reduction(Plated Archers with Great mauls, anyone?).

I miss those times.

The only real problems it had was the WPF carryover in Retirements and the fact that too many people wore plate and such.Oh and the lvl 45 Uberchars.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Teeth on December 14, 2011, 04:22:50 pm
Old version:

When someone killed an enemy players in a certain radius got a small bit of xp and gold. A few hundred xp and 8 gold for high levels. This way you slowly accumulated experience and gold over a round, which was shown in the top right corner. If your team won you got that amount. If you lost you got like 25% of it. Gold and xp was a looooooooooooooooooot slower than nowadays.

This system required you too stick close to the main group to get your xp. So basically the two teams were two big blobs. You only got xp and gold for near kills if you were alive, although you still got it up until 30 seconds after your death. Staying close to the rest and staying alive was very important. Flanking meant getting barely any xp. This caused for the infamous XP barns.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P32SuOJExR8
Here you can see the old system in action. Shot at 27 may 2010, equipment is very peasantlike, cause people hadn't accumulated that much gold back then. I started playing in december, when plate was pretty much the norm, and people outarmoured, outspammed, outran, outdamaged me. Which is why this system wont work without regular full wipes.

There was no upkeep. You buy an item, you keep it and can use it at will. I remember getting 200 gold for a won round, was a very good round. So lets say average of a 100 taken into account losing and the 25% gain if you lost. A 20k destrier would take 200 rounds for you to save up.

There was no level limit. Leveling got harder with every level, but not like the current 30-35 leveling. There were lvl 42 players and maybe even higher.

You could retire once every week after you had reached lvl 15. First retirement cost like 10k, and got 10k more expensive with every retirement (not sure of these values at all). Retiring would grant you a 10%(?) wpf bonus next gen. If you had 150 polearm wpf before retirement. You would have 15 to start with or something like that. Basically with retiring you could continously increase your max wpf. Leading to 30 agi 250 wpf katana spammers. Katana was like 104/105 speed, which was pretty gamebreaking.

Thats all I can remember right now. Hope chadz enables the old version on a server again, so you can see for yourself.

B3RS3RK was first, damn, ah well might as well post this anyway.

Oh yes, no slot system. There were archers in heavy armour with a danish greatsword (sword of cookies) on their backs.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Jacko on December 14, 2011, 04:25:09 pm
I can't believe people actually think the old system was better.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: B3RS3RK on December 14, 2011, 04:27:09 pm
I can't believe people actually think the old system was better.

I cant believe People actually think it wasn´t better.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Vibe on December 14, 2011, 04:33:16 pm
Tincan fest and gear/level crutching? No thanks. I remember a high level tincan could rape pretty much everyone in the old days (30 minute server reset days).
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: B3RS3RK on December 14, 2011, 04:34:38 pm
Tincan fest and gear/level crutching? No thanks.

It wasnt always a Tincan fest.

A few months before the upkeep patch it was just awesome.

And with a few little tweaks, old cRPG could have been way better than the new one(As I stated a few posts above).
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Vibe on December 14, 2011, 04:36:53 pm
It wasnt always a Tincan fest.

A few months before the upkeep patch it was just awesome.

And with a few little tweaks, old cRPG could have been way better than the new one(As I stated a few posts above).

I'll give you a "perhaps"
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Kophka on December 14, 2011, 04:38:14 pm
Pros of the old system : Throwing weapons flew where you pointed them, sort of. They were inaccurate as all hell, but they didn't drop in the dust infront of your target, 20 yards away. No upkeep.

Cons of the old system : All plate, all the time. Blobs of people having to be on top of each other to get xp/gold ; and people that actually used tactics such as : flanking, skirmishing, scouting, cavalry got absolutely nothing, even if they gave their team the win. All plate, all the time. Pre-upkeep, post retirement patch, people having 250 wpf at level 1, allowing them to stack strength and still have all the wpf they needed. All plate, all the time.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Teeth on December 14, 2011, 04:39:10 pm
 
I can't believe people actually think the old system was better.
Thats why chadz should rehost the old version on a server. To get everybody's nostalgia glasses off.

It was severely flawed. But, with our current balance, it could work. However only if you had a full wipe every two months. Which could be a fun experience.

Alternatively, good things should be taken from the old version and put into the new version. Cause there were things that worked better back then, and things that don't work as well now.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Jacko on December 14, 2011, 04:39:36 pm
I cant believe People actually think it wasn´t better.

Yeah, that's simply your highly subjective opinion, it still does not make it true.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Cris on December 14, 2011, 04:40:32 pm
Classic cRPG with tweaks.

Meaning Ways to make Plate more unattractive to wear all the time(Severe movement disadvantages or something).

And everything upped in Price by 50%(Weapons and armors)

Riding back to 1 per 5 Agi


Leveling back to the old System, but Softcap at 30 like now.

And stuff like that.

Riding was every 6 agility :-) And if you dont like cav, you are actually benefited by every three point, becuase horses required less riding before and now to get the same horse you use more skills point :)

(click to show/hide)

Old system with upkeep and less advantage for WPP after 160 or so if you ask me.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: B3RS3RK on December 14, 2011, 04:43:30 pm
Quote
I'll give you a "perhaps"
Awesome.Im gonna sniff on it and rub my dick against it so I come.



Quote
Yeah, that's simply your highly subjective opinion, it still does not make it true.

So is yours.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Blondin on December 14, 2011, 05:04:36 pm
Old cRPG = fun
New cRPG = balanced ±
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Keshian on December 14, 2011, 05:08:23 pm
Pros of the old system : Throwing weapons flew where you pointed them, sort of. They were inaccurate as all hell, but they didn't drop in the dust infront of your target, 20 yards away. No upkeep.

Cons of the old system : All plate, all the time. Blobs of people having to be on top of each other to get xp/gold ; and people that actually used tactics such as : flanking, skirmishing, scouting, cavalry got absolutely nothing, even if they gave their team the win. All plate, all the time. Pre-upkeep, post retirement patch, people having 250 wpf at level 1, allowing them to stack strength and still have all the wpf they needed. All plate, all the time.

Everyone just remembers the last 2 months of old cRPG and so sees through shit-covered glasses.  It was actually really fun and tin cans were REALLY rare until the end, same thing with heavy horses as the gold and xp you got per kill was absed on the level of the person killed so in the beginning you only made 50 gold in a round when you won not 200.  No one had the crazy wpf at level 1 until the last month or so as retirement was only 1 time a week so it took about 2.5 months of retiring to get to that point and only if you grinded like crazy for gold as it got prohibitively expensive very quickly.

And this shouldn't be an either/or.  chadz was proposing having a couple servers with the old website doing old cRPG with no patches/updates, while still focusing on current  cRPG.  I for one would love to have that option in addition to the current cRPG, definitely more than things like CTF, stronghold, and defend the virgin (which we still will have).  SInce everyone starts as a peasant and its not the main cRPG, it will be 5-6 months before the imbalances really start showing up as it takes a LOT of playing time before the linear/exponentional curves become game-breaking.  Wouldn't mind a simple reset at that point.

Unlimited levelling, it really mattered what you bought and people's outfits became their signature as it was expensive to sell and change into new gear, because gold/xp was based on a radius to the battle - archers/xbower had to be closer to the front where melee was fighting so it was easier to catch and kill them especially with your 9-10 athletics ninja shielder but it was expanded near the end so even cavalry and people doing side flanks of reasonable distance made a decent anmount of gold/xp.  I think it would be fun to try for a lot of people who were not around for it, especially the peasant battles where the first person to get a short bow was a god.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: cmp on December 14, 2011, 05:14:17 pm
chadz was proposing having a couple servers with the old website doing old cRPG with no patches/updates

chadz was proposing having a couple servers with the old website doing old cRPG with no patches/updates for people who pay
FYI.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Horns_Archive on December 14, 2011, 05:16:23 pm
Good work old farts on ringing the young wipper snappera up to sate lol. All I remember was great maul was 900 gold back then lol and stuff had cooler names like the sword of cookies and the looney tunes axe(may it rest in piece) and the log maul was a pole hammer and looked like a stick with a rock on the end of it lol
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Everkistus on December 14, 2011, 05:16:30 pm
Old.

One thing, that counts for more than all the item balancing, upkeep, and every other change made.

Horseback staffswing.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Spurdospera on December 14, 2011, 05:18:38 pm
Old.

One thing, that counts for more than all the item balancing, upkeep, and every other change made.

Horseback staffswing.
Also staffcouch.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: B3RS3RK on December 14, 2011, 05:23:23 pm
3 Words

Lance of Compensation
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Keshian on December 14, 2011, 05:33:40 pm
chadz was proposing having a couple servers with the old website doing old cRPG with no patches/updates for people who pay
FYI.

The most recent posting by him made no mention of that:

"Actually, I might give this one a try. See how long it works out until it crumbles from plated knights on elephants.

Not saying we're doing it, but if we do, understand that:
- support will be almost nonexistant,
- same for updates,
- strategus obviously won't work with it either,
- website will be the old, horrible one

and some other things. We'll discuss it and see if it could hurt the cRPG we actually like to continue improving."

What you mentioned was a random statement months ago when this idea had once been tentatively proposed when the upkeep patch was coming out and people were raging on the forums and he proposed a pay to play version based on before the patch and it was shot down because you can't charge money for a mod.   The problem is that it would likely be impossible without violating the copyright of the owners of Mount and Blade Warband.  I could see asking for a certain level of donations or something like that, but actually paying for the mod would sadly be a copyright violation. 
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: B3RS3RK on December 14, 2011, 05:36:17 pm
It wouldnt be a Copyright violation if Classic cRPG access was only given to Donators.So play cRPG for free - ok , but if you donate you can slo play the classiv version if you like :D That would be cool.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: The_Bloody_Nine on December 14, 2011, 05:46:18 pm
classic = classy, epic, nostalgia and fail.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Kafein on December 14, 2011, 05:52:58 pm
Yeah, that's simply your highly subjective opinion, it still does not make it true.

Heh, your's is highly subjective too.


Sometimes I ask myself wether those claiming that the old cRPG was "full of tincans" ever played it. It wasn't. And most of the tincans were noobs. Furthermore, it's only the combination of high level, retirement wpf and tincan armor that was making (very few) people OP.


It sure wasn't balanced at all compared to the current version. First reason being the stat differences. But hell, who cares when the game is actually fun.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Patricia on December 14, 2011, 06:04:30 pm
I still remember the good old days of July-August '10.

Not many people knew how to block, so fights weren't endless block battle #1023847 until someone get shot and die due to stagger.

Leveling up and getting gear was incredibly hard, I remember when Chavezhp5 first got his green tunic over mail, it was basically ultra heavy armor at the time.

Light leather was the armor most people were aiming for before moving up to the mail armors, you needed to play weeks after weeks to get the piece of armor you wanted, instead of playing 5 hours and buying all you need like now.

In August, I started a new character and the Churburg cuirass were just recently added, I farmed naked with nothing but a morning star for more than a full month almost playing 24/7 then rage-sold it when ShinySpoons who had 12 powerstrike would 1 hit kill me with his longsword.

I also loved running around in my Churburg cuirass with my straw hat and shit shoveling shoes because I had no money left and everyone was calling me out on it.

Good old days.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Teeth on December 14, 2011, 06:27:39 pm
the log maul was a pole hammer and looked like a stick with a rock on the end of it lol
I remember it being called a boulder on a stick. I loved that simplistic name, especially cause that was exactly what it was. Just a stick with a huge rock tied to it with a few ropes.

Thats the worst difference between old and new cRPG. Things were more relaxed and funny. Ridiculous item names, ladderpulting and trolling. It was just a funny game.

WHY SO SERIOUS?
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Kocik_4th on December 14, 2011, 06:29:53 pm
retirement system should turn the old one.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Keshian on December 14, 2011, 06:32:34 pm
I remember it being called a boulder on a stick. I loved that simplistic name, especially cause that was exactly what it was. Just a stick with a huge rock tied to it with a few ropes.

Thats the worst difference between old and new cRPG. Things were more relaxed and funny. Ridiculous item names, ladderpulting and trolling. It was just a funny game.

WHY SO SERIOUS?

Multipliers.  Yeah, no I agree people were more relaxed and alid back about the whole thing because you didnt have to pay upkeep - so who cares if you fucked around and did a far-ranging flank or did goofy antics.  Its not like you really lost anything.  But trying to stay ahead of upkeep and saving up to buy looms has definitely changed the atmosphere a bit.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Nurax on December 14, 2011, 07:25:09 pm
I'd say the old a little bit formed cRPG would be the best. At least the gold/xp gaining system and upkeep staff was better back then...
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Anal Bleeding on December 14, 2011, 08:53:28 pm
200 wpf was awesome, wish you could still get that.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Vexus on December 14, 2011, 09:15:39 pm
Remember the looney toon axe? :D (Or whatever it was called)
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Dexxtaa on December 14, 2011, 09:18:39 pm
Remember the looney toon axe? :D (Or whatever it was called)

Yes. Gone are those golden days.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: B3RS3RK on December 14, 2011, 09:21:22 pm
Looney toon axe was hilarious.I remember this one special Chinese Player on EU in Mail and plate with a Sniper xbow, a Shield and a Looney axe.

Even with his 300+ Ping he was good because he just swung like crazy.


Bes thing is, we could reimplement this axe now and it wouldnt be op due to it always getting stuck in walls and such before hitting lol :D
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Arrowblood on December 14, 2011, 09:27:31 pm
We all had the most fun in the old times.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Kenji on December 14, 2011, 09:37:56 pm
I remember it being called a boulder on a stick. I loved that simplistic name, especially cause that was exactly what it was. Just a stick with a huge rock tied to it with a few ropes.

Thats the worst difference between old and new cRPG. Things were more relaxed and funny. Ridiculous item names, ladderpulting and trolling. It was just a funny game.

WHY SO SERIOUS?
*Sarcasm* Sure thing, friend, building one's own fun on another's pain is completely enjoyable for all of us back in the good old days, eh?

Casual players like me couldn't earn enough money for anything back then, not to mention any ladders to troll around. The ping on EU made me unable to learn manual block, not to mention I couldn't even down/up block forks. (Seeing Merc_Fedor dressed up as a peasant with a pair of heavy gauntlets being able to manual block and kill a tincan was quite a sight, though)

Things weren't as balanced back then, as well, all I remember was after a month with 200ping and having 1:100 k:d, I quitted.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Kafein on December 14, 2011, 09:41:15 pm
*Sarcasm* Sure thing, friend, building one's own fun on another's pain is completely enjoyable for all of us back in the good old days, eh?

Casual players like me couldn't earn enough money for anything back then, not to mention any ladders to troll around. The ping on EU made me unable to learn manual block, not to mention I couldn't even down/up block forks. (Seeing Merc_Fedor dressed up as a peasant with a pair of heavy gauntlets being able to manual block and kill a tincan was quite a sight, though)

Things weren't as balanced back then, as well, all I remember was after a month with 200ping and having 1:100 k:d, I quitted.

WHY SO SERIOUS ?  :(
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Kenji on December 14, 2011, 10:11:19 pm
WHY SO SERIOUS ?  :(
It's not being serious, friend, it's called rage :mrgreen:

Can't really help it if your character always dies and can't do anything for 5 minutes, then an hour passed by and nothing much was accomplished, only left with a sense of a waste of time.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: B3RS3RK on December 14, 2011, 10:12:01 pm

Casual players like me couldn't earn enough money for anything back then

How come I had Full Transitional Set with Vaegir war mask, steel shield, long espada, heavy lance and a Destrier with Gen2 and lvl 30 again like a month or two before Upkeep patch then?

I was a Casual Player back at that time.Ping was good mostly on EU and such, too, only problem was if there were 200 or more people.I only started to block decently about two months before upkeep patch with practising on Duel servers.Back then when almost nobody feinted or used all those fancy tactics like hiltslashing, just plain old Strike and block games for Minutes, going on and on.

It wasnt hard to save up money at all in classic cRPG.It just took time.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Kenji on December 15, 2011, 12:24:49 am
How come I had Full Transitional Set with Vaegir war mask, steel shield, long espada, heavy lance and a Destrier with Gen2 and lvl 30 again like a month or two before Upkeep patch then?

I was a Casual Player back at that time.Ping was good mostly on EU and such, too, only problem was if there were 200 or more people.I only started to block decently about two months before upkeep patch with practising on Duel servers.Back then when almost nobody feinted or used all those fancy tactics like hiltslashing, just plain old Strike and block games for Minutes, going on and on.

It wasnt hard to save up money at all in classic cRPG.It just took time.
And what would be your definition of a casual player?
For me, it is roughly 8 hours a week, mostly on the weekends. And I did not enjoy the time spent on the old cRPG, at all.

Also, I believe we are not on the same timeline as we played, if the upkeep patch is roughly the start of 2011, I played cRPG during the summer of 2010 if I remembered correctly. Have only came back to cRPG since the date I registered on this forum.

And was quite satisfied with the change.

Edit: I have completely forgotten when I started cRPG, I shall check my receipt of purchase on Warband key, because that was when I decided to pay for warband so that I can play cRPG.

Edit 2: I purchased it on August 2nd, 2010, so that's when I started cRPG.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on December 15, 2011, 01:21:35 am
There's a whole thread about this already.

You missed posting this in every other thread before this one.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bobthehero on December 15, 2011, 01:44:09 am
Old with new anim bow or cut damage on them.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: hippy_with_a_scimi on December 15, 2011, 02:29:24 am

archers/xbower had to be closer to the front where melee was fighting so it was easier to catch and kill them especially with your 9-10 athletics ninja shielder


Hey i think that was me !  actually in the end i had 12 athletics  i was pushing it to see if the rumors that beyond 10 you would get a increase in running  :D

i used to flank in the old system and still got a great share of the xp and slaughtered thousands of archers !

good times when archers tried to run... but couldn't 

                                              actually in those times archers were real men and fought back  :lol:
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Keshian on December 15, 2011, 02:57:27 am
Hey i think that was me !  actually in the end i had 12 athletics  i was pushing it to see if the rumors that beyond 10 you would get a increase in running  :D

i used to flank in the old system and still got a great share of the xp and slaughtered thousands of archers !

good times when archers tried to run... but couldn't 

                                              actually in those times archers were real men and fought back   :lol:

Yeah, i remembered Robin_Longstride pulling a flamberge out of his crotch when you got to close to him shooting arrows.  Good times.  I had 14 athleticas near the end, but I am really looking forward to me and everyone starting as peasants and it taking 4 months minimum before anything like that is possible (unless you go 3-42 and convert all your points to agility and get up to level 35 (which back then would be equivalenet o getting to level 32 or halfway to 33 now).  BUt that was part of the fun, so many people had unique and original builds and the plethora of diversity was awesome.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: JihadistMexican on December 15, 2011, 03:18:23 am
Maaannn ya'll dun remember the REAL classic days... Warband Beta was the Golden Days
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Patricia on December 15, 2011, 03:32:02 am
Maaannn ya'll dun remember the REAL classic days... Warband Beta was the Golden Days

Too fucking bad we're talking about cRPG and not Shitband.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: JihadistMexican on December 15, 2011, 04:34:16 am
Too fucking bad we're talking about cRPG and not Shitband.

Do I sense... rage?
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Spartacus on December 15, 2011, 04:58:33 am
when i started playing crpg it was the old one it was so much fun
now i just play because i am addicted thats it
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Huey Newton on December 15, 2011, 05:02:13 am
when i started playing crpg it was the old one it was so much fun
now i just play because i am addicted thats it

this
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: t1337Dude on December 15, 2011, 05:21:57 am
Old cRPG sucked. All we have is just a bunch of people basking in nostalgia and longing for their overpowered characters.


cRPG is still hell of a lot of fun as it is, and I honestly prefer how it is now.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bothersome_Aldryk on December 15, 2011, 07:07:16 am
I never had an "OP" char. I never got beyond level 31. I had a once loomed sword, and two once loomed polearms. I still enjoyed it quite a bit. Fights were fast. People had more WPF, so it wasn't the slow-paced manual block extravaganza that is now. People had recognizable gearsets because once you saved up for your dream armor, chances were that you wore it for a very long time. Peasanthood was actually something enjoyable instead of being the 3 rounds that you spend autowalking into enemies. People's builds were all over the place, like Seductive Susie who had 3 or 6, I don't remember which, and a ton of Agi for weapon master. No looms or anything like that, but she could still fire her bow like a machine gun.

I could go on with what I liked about that period of time, but I think you can all see where I'm going with this.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: naked_mike on December 15, 2011, 07:12:02 am
I miss some aspects of the old CRPG, but I really enjoy the upkeep, sexier new website, and the slot system.  I liked the difficulty in making money and buying needed equipment in classic CRPG.  What I wish for is a lengthening of needed time/effort put in to earn top-tier gear, bonuses for killing enemy players (or being nearby when it happens, because more than likely you helped if you're nearby), increased difficulty to ride horses, and more incentive to play as infantry.

I agree about the change of attitude, but the overall tone of many players since I started playing are abysmally negative.  Now I feel the playerbase is a bit more serious, with less tolerance for dicking around.  I like that.

I think I began playing CRPG in 2009, or maybe early to mid 2010.  I was unable to play for a year, beginning late 2010, so when I returned I experienced all of the changes at once.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: B3RS3RK on December 15, 2011, 08:46:53 am
And what would be your definition of a casual player?

1-2 hour a day on average.Meaning somedays not at all and some more, but always not too much.

I have no Idea when I began playing it, though tbh.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Nurax on December 15, 2011, 11:46:25 am
To be honest, it was the hard work getting exp and gold and items what I loved most
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Vexus on December 15, 2011, 12:46:37 pm
I remember when after some update/nerf there where so many shielders on the fields it was getting a little annoying so I made a protest and made a new character with the specific role of mauler (Mind you it's not an easy class to play with if you ONLY use a maul against anything)

And one time I was alone in my team vs 6-8 people and managed to kill them all (2 of them where xbowers) and everyone at the round afterwards shouting impossible! impossible! but after that day I kept on getting targeted by everyone lol.

Was my alt bonetooth probably few know the name as I no longer play much this mod.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Herkkutatti on December 15, 2011, 01:30:23 pm
classic was epic and that's why i got addicted to this game... and now i have been thinking of leaving ....
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Nurax on December 15, 2011, 01:47:03 pm
classic was epic and that's why i got addicted to this game... and now i have been thinking of leaving ....

Dito, with the only diffrence, I already left^^
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Arrowblood on December 15, 2011, 01:54:46 pm
To be honest, it was the hard work getting exp and gold and items what I loved most
this
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: dodnet on December 15, 2011, 02:25:45 pm
I didnt play old cRPG (started in march 2011) but now I got some glimpse of what old cRPG was. I really like the current one, but one thing I like about the stories of the old one is that it's harder to get some gear. I played a bit of Nord Invasion and I liked that system too (except that fighting bots on 3 maps gets boring really fast), it takes quite some time to get better gear.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: okiN on December 15, 2011, 02:29:40 pm
These polls always end with "new" winning. Accept that shit, son.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: B3RS3RK on December 15, 2011, 02:32:31 pm
These polls always end with "new" winning. Accept that shit, son.

Yeah because so many of the Old players left and many new Guys just know the new one or the last days of the old one(Where, to be honest, it was shit due to Uberchars and plate almost everywhere).

Otherwise it would be a lot shorter,
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: okiN on December 15, 2011, 02:39:39 pm
Denying reality won't actually change it, you know. You can make all the baseless assumptions you like about voting trends, but the fact of the results remains constant.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Vexus on December 15, 2011, 02:58:15 pm
These polls always end with "new" winning. Accept that shit, son.

And if a server with old database was in the game the other servers would lose almost half of their population, your point?
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: B3RS3RK on December 15, 2011, 02:59:33 pm
Denying reality won't actually change it, you know. You can make all the baseless assumptions you like about voting trends, but the fact of the results remains constant.

I know.But you dont need to smack it in my face :(
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: okiN on December 15, 2011, 03:26:48 pm
And if a server with old database was in the game the other servers would lose almost half of their population, your point?

My point is that a certain proportion of the population will always resist change -- any change. As long as a clear majority approves of the changes made, chances are the mod is headed roughly in the right direction. The nostalgia-goggled whiners can just go suck an egg.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: B3RS3RK on December 15, 2011, 03:49:14 pm
My point is that a certain proportion of the population will always resist change -- any change. As long as a clear majority approves of the changes made, chances are the mod is headed roughly in the right direction. The nostalgia-goggled whiners can just go suck an egg.

How comes there seems to be more whine now than back in old cRPG?:D
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Meow on December 15, 2011, 03:51:33 pm
More players?

Let me correct that: More people on the forums.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Braeden on December 15, 2011, 03:53:16 pm
How comes there seems to be more whine now than back in old cRPG?:D

There isn't.

We bogged down the entire Taleworlds forum with our posts, and I assure you they were (regrettably) not about how happy everyone was.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Patricia on December 15, 2011, 04:02:32 pm
Old cRPG sucked. All we have is just a bunch of people basking in nostalgia and longing for their overpowered characters.


cRPG is still hell of a lot of fun as it is, and I honestly prefer how it is now.

I was anything but OP, I never got past level 25 in Ol'rpg and I had to fight level 40-45, it was amazing, game was fast paced and I didn't have the time to jack off during duels like I do now.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Keshian on December 15, 2011, 05:04:58 pm
My point is that a certain proportion of the population will always resist change -- any change. As long as a clear majority approves of the changes made, chances are the mod is headed roughly in the right direction. The nostalgia-goggled whiners can just go suck an egg.

But by that measure - new cRPG is what people are used to so the 60% is resisting a change to include another older version that many never had the chance to experience and I would love a new change where everyone is a peasant again and you dont become a level 30 lord with all the gear you want in 2 days.  It would be very new because it would have the updates up to the point it was discontinued even though many of those changes happened while people were becoming OP.  I am just glad 40% of this community appreciates change.

Personally I love change and would appreciate having 1-2 servers with the old cRPG in place instead of only the current version of cRPG.  I would actually play again - i am down to 1-2 hours of cRPG in a week, if that.  I could see myself playing cRPG primarily again on servers using the old cRPG system and I know a dozen people off-hand who are similarly situated where they hardly play or dont play at all, but would come back to play old cRPG.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Arrowblood on December 15, 2011, 05:08:49 pm
devs, cant you see our tears?
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Berserkadin on December 15, 2011, 05:13:43 pm
Wish I could change my vote, classic crpg > new crpg. I started to play during the last months of crpg, got out of peasanthood and was around miltia level, altough I had ALOT more fun. Playing peasant was really fun and challenging, and when you got those kills, it felt GOOD. Picked up a spear as fast as possible to be able to poke tincans, with 3 shields to be able to do some life-saving and arrow blocking. Barely play anymore, everyone got the same builds, you can pick up any gear without any problems, it's all a grind to 31 to pick up a loom that gives you +1 dmg, and well, the epicness is lost.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Teeth on December 15, 2011, 05:19:06 pm
That the majority of the people like the new cRPG, doesn't mean that there can't be a server running the old version. For newer players it would be great too I suppose, to see what all the fuss is actually about. Also everyone that build some nice nostalgia glasses over time will be remembered of how it actually was.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Nurax on December 15, 2011, 10:32:19 pm
But by that measure - new cRPG is what people are used to so the 60% is resisting a change to include another older version that many never had the chance to experience and I would love a new change where everyone is a peasant again and you dont become a level 30 lord with all the gear you want in 2 days.  It would be very new because it would have the updates up to the point it was discontinued even though many of those changes happened while people were becoming OP.  I am just glad 40% of this community appreciates change.

Personally I love change and would appreciate having 1-2 servers with the old cRPG in place instead of only the current version of cRPG.  I would actually play again - i am down to 1-2 hours of cRPG in a week, if that.  I could see myself playing cRPG primarily again on servers using the old cRPG system and I know a dozen people off-hand who are similarly situated where they hardly play or dont play at all, but would come back to play old cRPG.

This
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on December 15, 2011, 10:52:19 pm
devs, cant you see our tears?

Wanders into the thread at the flag, reads it in context, curses and leaves...
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Christo on December 15, 2011, 11:12:15 pm
At fifteen, I had the will to  learn ; at thirty, I could stand ; at forty, I had no  doubts ; at fifty, I understood the heavenly Bidding ;  at sixty, my ears were opened ; at seventy, I could  do as my heart lusted without trespassing from the  square.

...

To be honest, the 2010 June-August era was the best. that with some slight fixes would kick ass.

The current cRPG is too stale and boring, and makes me GTX in 5 minutes.

PS: Sure, on classic we had annoyances like Birdman/etc, but those guys were one in a million.

The nostalgia-goggled whiners can just go suck an egg.

no u.

u_u
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Formless on December 16, 2011, 04:24:10 am
While I preferred the classic CRPG it was becoming a tin can fest, and was totally unfriendly to newbs.  As a result from the way I remember it the player base was slowly disappearing and there was not enough new blood to replace the players that were leaving. So I understand the changes that were made and I have to agree these changes brought the mod from the brink of death.

But what I loved about the old crpg was the freedom to create a character that you really wanted, with the characteristics armour and arms that you really wanted and you could play in all the time.   I would love to come back to that. 

Now I think CRPG may be facing another challenge another brink of death moment were too many players are leaving and not enough new players coming in.   My suggestion is to go back to the core of what made the old crpg so good, but keep the new per minute exp and money pay out scheme, the skip the fun button and introduce a stamina bar to keep the tin cans in check and their tin can horses. 

Just my 2 cents.  It will be interesting to see what chadz and his team do next to keep the mod going.  I hope its something clever as I really really love this game and especially this mod and want to see it going for a long long time to come.



Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Xant on December 16, 2011, 04:54:00 am
Too many players are leaving? Sure, player count took a hit when Skyrim and BF3 came out, but from what I've seen c-RPG still has at least as many players as ever. There's a vocal minority who keeps threatening to quit but then quietly crawls back the day after.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bothersome_Aldryk on December 16, 2011, 04:59:08 am
Many of my old friends have quit or play so rarely that they might as well have quit :\. John/Thol barely plays, Gafferjack gave away his looms and quit, Patricia quit but still posts every 2 seconds on the forum, Troublesome hasn't technically quit but almost never plays, etc etc. The list could go on. There's still plenty of people of course, but the number of old-time crpg buddies that I have that still play are getting quite small. We still play native a bit, and other games, but not as much c-RPG.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Xant on December 16, 2011, 05:12:15 am
Of course everyone knows people who've quit, but there's also new players coming in.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bothersome_Aldryk on December 16, 2011, 05:13:48 am
New people coming in are rarely able to replace friends who've left due to dissatisfaction, IMO.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Dezilagel on December 16, 2011, 05:17:52 am
New people coming in are rarely able to replace friends who've left due to dissatisfaction, IMO.

That's a weirld way of thinking :?
 
Old players, tired of the game leave and new, eager fresh blood joins = great no? Potential recruits, actual movement on the "player market" and instead of a bunch of grumpy "1.0! 1.0 Was THE SHIT NUBLETS WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS GAME BALANCE OMGWTFBBQ Dead mod zomfg!!!oneoneone" - vets.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: MrShovelFace on December 16, 2011, 06:05:59 am
New people coming in are rarely able to replace friends who've left due to dissatisfaction, IMO.

an opinion cant be used to establish a fact
no wait i see what you are saying
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: BlackMilk on December 16, 2011, 06:54:28 am
Maaannn ya'll dun remember the REAL classic days... Warband Beta was the Golden Days
indeed

I used to love the ooooooold animations in warband back then :D
Crushthrough on side swings of the gm werent back either (or am I mistaken?)
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Kivlov on December 16, 2011, 06:58:38 am
Honestly the only thing that will end this debate is putting up an old server and seeing how many people have rose coloured glasses on and who genuinely liked peasant wars slowly evolving into knight battles.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Tydeus on December 16, 2011, 08:01:56 am
classic xmas crpg is up and kesh is on the server, let crpg 2010 commence!
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bothersome_Aldryk on December 16, 2011, 09:10:05 am
Holy shit I can't wait to play!

EDIT: I'm luvvin' it!
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Keshian on December 16, 2011, 11:03:39 am
This is so much fun.  Im going to stay up all night (lsleepya t work, but this is really fun)
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Nurax on December 16, 2011, 05:34:05 pm
O.O This is so much fun :D Thank you chadz
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: JackieChan on December 16, 2011, 05:57:44 pm
god, that Xmas thingy jsut reminded me how much fun was Crpg at that time
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Templar_Ratigan on December 16, 2011, 10:22:24 pm
I can't believe people actually think the old system was better.

It's fun vs snore, the new version really has no chance.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Candiru on December 16, 2011, 10:32:39 pm
I can't believe people actually think the old system was better.

Indeed. It was fun when there was nothing else.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bobthehero on December 16, 2011, 10:43:04 pm
Stick to the new server then, I know I won't.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Dolby on December 16, 2011, 10:44:38 pm
We want classic cRPG with a few new things
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Templar_Ratigan on December 16, 2011, 10:48:15 pm
I think chadz should leave this up for those who want it and the miserable, boring 'effective build' players can stick to their version.

Everybody wins!!!
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bothersome_Aldryk on December 16, 2011, 11:18:31 pm
I agree with Ratigan.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Miley on December 16, 2011, 11:26:55 pm
Many of you shouldn't be posting about classic cRPG lawl.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Christo on December 16, 2011, 11:28:29 pm
Many of you shouldn't be posting about classic cRPG lawl.

Because?
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: JackieChan on December 16, 2011, 11:34:45 pm
Quote
Many of you shouldn't be posting about classic cRPG lawl.
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: John on December 17, 2011, 02:41:22 am
I'm sure half of you will be back when every single person is in plate like it used to be.  The rest will be back when every single person is also a horse archer with a plated horse, like it was heading before the upkeep patch. 

Yeah, I think the old cRPG was more fun than this one when everybody was still fairly low level and modestly equipped, but the "endgame" of the old cRPG was vastly inferior to the current cRPG. 
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bobthehero on December 17, 2011, 02:53:10 am
Ugh... there is far more plate people in new cRPG...
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: MountedRhader on December 17, 2011, 03:31:26 am
I want a chance at wild extremist builds and vastly unfair but extremely fun and addicting cRPG aka. Old cRPG.


Not this new trash where everything has a safety feature, and is "balanced".
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Zisa on December 17, 2011, 04:28:39 am
Ugh... there is far more plate people in new cRPG...
too true.

The only thing different since then is the fear of 200 wpf and the illusion of mediocrity being king.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: ArchonAlarion on December 17, 2011, 07:34:14 am
Nah, I distinctly remember half the server population riding around on plated chargers and mamlukes as tincans, with crossbows, flamberges, lances, etc. The other half being assorted heavily armored hybrids. The new c-rpg has nothing on the old in terms of item stacking, especially of armor and horses, which is obvious and deducible if you have never even played the old version.

The only thing good about the old c-rpg was a more invested feeling you had in your character and even that could be a good or bad thing. Otherwise new c-rpg is better: more options, better balanced, more realistic, easier for new players, more features, better animations/collision detection, etc.

Old c-rpg is a step back. Nostalgic, chaotic, projectile happy, XP barn happy, yes, but not actually better if you divorce your personal anecdotal experiences and sentimentality from both options (at least, this is how I feel, arguments could be made as to why the old version is in fact mechanically superior).
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bobthehero on December 17, 2011, 08:27:32 am
And I distincly remember the masses of people not wearing heavy armor and the rarity of the plated charger.

Balance is shitty in both version.

Game balanced for new player = boringly carebearish.

New feature I agree with.

Anims and detection is shitty.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Dezilagel on December 17, 2011, 11:44:56 am
So... I'm not a vet, but this is my experience from trying this "old" c-rpg:

1. Go on server

2. Everyone on team is useless except for ranged and a couple of nolifers who have been levelling for the entire day

3. ARCHERS!

4. Rage more at archers

5. Get into a melee fight, 2 mins of grinding someone down with a pitchfork and 0 ps

6. Main objective seems to be to die in such a favorable position (= in the "center of mass") as possible, so you can grind your stats further

7. Meh'd

 Obvious exaggregation, but really imo the mod has come far from this blatantly unbalanced, grind focused bullshit that this appears to be to me.

People call it "hardcore", but really? A game can be called "hardcore" when high skill is required to get into it, but this really just seems more focused around grinding, and rewarding those who play 24/7 so immensely isn't "hardcore" in any sense imo.

Now, to the good points:

People say combat used to be faster (well, for a selected few, the grinders), that I'd like to see return.

Some of the items are just "lol!", bring them back but fix their stats!

Strat battles I've been getting mixed input from. Some speak of hours of grinding down an immense amount of tickets while other say that it was much more fun due to being more active. I'll assume both are correct, but would like to see a faster pace to strat.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Templar_Ratigan on December 17, 2011, 04:02:23 pm
I'm sure half of you will be back when every single person is in plate like it used to be.  The rest will be back when every single person is also a horse archer with a plated horse, like it was heading before the upkeep patch. 

Yeah, I think the old cRPG was more fun than this one when everybody was still fairly low level and modestly equipped, but the "endgame" of the old cRPG was vastly inferior to the current cRPG.

The difference between the old and the new is that I used to play without plate or any high end equipment in the old version and still performed extremely well, in the new version if I want to do well I am basically forced to play a certain way with certain equipment that is effective. It's true if you play with silly weak weapons it will be harder, but at least if you were good enough you could still do so in the older versions.

This current version does away with all that, if you arent at least wearing medium armour and a nice heirloomed poleaxe/big 2 hander sword you are a waste in melee. As for ranged, that is a different matter entirely which I wont get into because I dont want to make a big post longer.

You still have the choice in this current version, but it is an illusion of a choice, afterall if you make something so bad that it isnt even worth considering then it can barely be called a choice at all can it?

I think too many people are obsessed about how big their score is, (which is nice from time to time just not ALL THE TIME), rather than how much fun they are having, although I apologise for this since ive repeated it far too much.

I enjoy freedom, some people enjoy domination. Maybe that is the conflict causer here.

If anything it is LESS balanced. The best idea of all to me would be to combine both, you can have the times 5's if you want along side the area of effect system.

But frankly the game is still a grind in the current version, what about those people running around at level 34+? They are rare sure, but that is even worse than the older one where anyone could get there in a reasonable amount of time, in this version noone who starts later could ever hope to catch up.

I should add that I dont hate the newer version, I just prefer this one, if it was left up I cant see any harm myself, it's not like chadz has to keep working on it alongside the new one, besides it already has some newer parts in it, like the earlier release attacks and certain animations.

ps: I suppose the biggest advantage I see in the older version is it's stability, I still occasionally skip, but it might be once every 3-4 maps, rather than every 30 seconds.

To add to this I find the animations much clearer and the blocking far more responsive. Incidentally it's weird how super fast sniper archery doesnt bother me that much in the old patch.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Rebelyell on December 17, 2011, 04:54:55 pm
old crpg=fun new crpg=lessfun

 in new crpg  i am gen 16 5 mw items and 237k gold but still old one is way more fun for me
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Dolby on December 17, 2011, 05:42:07 pm
old crpg=fun new crpg=lessfun

 in new crpg  i am gen 16 5 mw items and 237k gold but still old one is way more fun for me
Thats true
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Keshian on December 17, 2011, 05:46:14 pm
I went 12-2 with my 1 powerthrow rock-thrower with a scythe. (11 were rock kills).  I am having so much fun.  And no - archers were not OP, i keep killing them with my rocks :).
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Templar_Ratigan on December 17, 2011, 06:09:58 pm
This reminds me of a silly effort to keep counter strike 1.5 alive when WON(cdkey auth) servers were shut off and steam just came out with cs 1.6. Sure people played it but in the end they just had to move on.

I suspect you are right, after all I personally love the older versions, however I severely doubt a lot of the current players share my sentiment.

People often feel the need to move forward with the current version when it comes to games and mods, possibly there is a sense that this is the 'legitimate' version and any others would be twisting the game somehow.

Or else they like the current patch of course. Anyhow I imagine it might wither and die, but I wish it wouldnt.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Zisa on December 17, 2011, 08:08:09 pm
I suspect you are right, after all I personally love the older versions, however I severely doubt a lot of the current players share my sentiment.

People often feel the need to move forward with the current version when it comes to games and mods, possibly there is a sense that this is the 'legitimate' version and any others would be twisting the game somehow.

Or else they like the current patch of course. Anyhow I imagine it might wither and die, but I wish it wouldnt.
check the poll results before 'a lot of players etc..'
It's sitting at 40% prefer classic coke, warts and all. The other 60% had no clue how to play a peasant anyway, and would rather play a more cerebral (i.e. tailored for slow thinkers) game like chess :P
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Braeden on December 17, 2011, 08:46:49 pm
It takes old cRPG a while to get fully broken.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: John on December 17, 2011, 10:08:56 pm
Y'know Ratigan, I just plain see almost all those points in the exact opposite way.  I think the mean armor level was way higher toward the end of old cRPG than it is now.  Of course, the heirlooming of armor only became massively widespread afterward, so that's probably why one might see it differently.  Now that everyone knows how good armor heirlooms are, it will be even worse.  And as for personal experience, I found doing well without heavy armor is easier now than then.  I use a padded jack and a good one hander and do pretty well.  Back in the day, there'd be no way I could stand to use such a setup with all the armored horses with plated knights on them.  I suppose there could also be some discrepancy due to the Europe/NA divide.  We have some pretty obsessed people.  Then again, you guys had plate a long time before us, so who knows. 

Anyway, I may play the old cRPG for a bit while it's still young and awesome, but I know how it ends and will not be looking forward to it.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Zisa on December 17, 2011, 10:34:58 pm
Y'know Ratigan, I just plain see almost all those points in the exact opposite way.  I think the mean armor level was way higher toward the end of old cRPG than it is now.  Of course, the heirlooming of armor only became massively widespread afterward, so that's probably why one might see it differently.  Now that everyone knows how good armor heirlooms are, it will be even worse.  And as for personal experience, I found doing well without heavy armor is easier now than then.  I use a padded jack and a good one hander and do pretty well.  Back in the day, there'd be no way I could stand to use such a setup with all the armored horses with plated knights on them.  I suppose there could also be some discrepancy due to the Europe/NA divide.  We have some pretty obsessed people.  Then again, you guys had plate a long time before us, so who knows. 

Anyway, I may play the old cRPG for a bit while it's still young and awesome, but I know how it ends and will not be looking forward to it.
meh I never used heavy armor ...
it ends with the whingers nerfing everything
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bothersome_Aldryk on December 17, 2011, 10:35:20 pm
It helps that John also plays almost solely on low pop servers, which generally makes it easier to do light armor
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: John on December 17, 2011, 10:41:38 pm
meh I never used heavy armor ...
it ends with the whingers nerfing everything

Well a lot of things needed to be nerfed!  200+ proficiency, 105 speed katanas that you needed 10 ping to even see start a swing were one of them!  Crushthrough weapons with 30 strength that couldn't be interrupted because of their speed and crushed almost every time were another.  Archers...

There's just a lot of bullcrap I'd rather not live through again, and everybody knows about them beforehand this time around, so I'm skeptical about this whole thing. 
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Zisa on December 17, 2011, 11:17:23 pm
Well a lot of things needed to be nerfed!  200+ proficiency, 105 speed katanas that you needed 10 ping to even see start a swing were one of them!  Crushthrough weapons with 30 strength that couldn't be interrupted because of their speed and crushed almost every time were another.  Archers...

There's just a lot of bullcrap I'd rather not live through again, and everybody knows about them beforehand this time around, so I'm skeptical about this whole thing.
it only goes to 104 the katana after 1 retire, sorry :P
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Stabby_Dave on December 17, 2011, 11:19:14 pm
Atm classic crpg is almost unplayable as the all the new crpg archer are creaming themselves at how easy it was back then. Maybe better armour and a shield would make it better but its not fun right now.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on December 17, 2011, 11:46:49 pm
Atm classic crpg is almost unplayable as the all the new crpg archer are creaming themselves at how easy it was back then. Maybe better armour and a shield would make it better but its not fun right now.

This.

I'll swing by when you all finally level up grind and get real crap to defend yourselves with, otherwise I don't see the point in performing mass murder when I can do the same in strategus... Also, I'm still waiting for this tale of "Tears trust me, being a peasant is so much more fun!" I'm watching, waiting, looking, observing... I don't see it. You mean more people are low level and with no gear and thus you can have more peasant fights? Great, another start-of-strategus flashback...

New cRPG for me. I can see the appeal for others, but for me old cRPG is simply not my cup of tea.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bothersome_Aldryk on December 18, 2011, 12:09:25 am
Being a peasant when there are actual high levels is fun as hell for me. I love desperately trying to stay alive and feeling outmatched. Plus, tailing a high level player was just amusing.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: John on December 18, 2011, 01:56:43 am
it only goes to 104 the katana after 1 retire, sorry :P

I was talking about how they used to be - base 103 speed with +3 speed and damage at the first heirloom.  Which is 106, come to think of it.  Pretty nasty.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Zisa on December 18, 2011, 03:46:18 am
I was talking about how they used to be - base 103 speed with +3 speed and damage at the first heirloom.  Which is 106, come to think of it.  Pretty nasty.
I would like that.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bobthehero on December 18, 2011, 05:16:34 am
This.

I'll swing by when you all finally level up grind and get real crap to defend yourselves with, otherwise I don't see the point in performing mass murder when I can do the same in strategus... Also, I'm still waiting for this tale of "Tears trust me, being a peasant is so much more fun!" I'm watching, waiting, looking, observing... I don't see it. You mean more people are low level and with no gear and thus you can have more peasant fights? Great, another start-of-strategus flashback...

New cRPG for me. I can see the appeal for others, but for me old cRPG is simply not my cup of tea.

I personally dislike peasant phase, but look forward for the upkeepless/and absence of wpf reduction for heavy armor.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: SixThumbs on December 18, 2011, 06:38:45 am
Joined too late in the game to experience the "old" cRPG and from listening to all you ninnies it doesn't really sound that interesting anyway.

Except for the faster game speed and slightly more ridiculous weapon stats.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Keshian on December 18, 2011, 09:03:50 am
"Classic" is good because it made me appreciate New CRPG more.

Not quite understanding why you keep bitching so hard about classic cRPG.  Its just another server option, not replacing new cRPG, so no real reason to get pissed or constantly harp about how much you dislike it.  A bunch of us enjoy, are glad its an option, and are eagerly awaiting for an na server.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Dezilagel on December 18, 2011, 12:36:11 pm
The difference between the old and the new is that I used to play without plate or any high end equipment in the old version and still performed extremely well, in the new version if I want to do well I am basically forced to play a certain way with certain equipment that is effective. It's true if you play with silly weak weapons it will be harder, but at least if you were good enough you could still do so in the older versions.

This current version does away with all that, if you arent at least wearing medium armour and a nice heirloomed poleaxe/big 2 hander sword you are a waste in melee. As for ranged, that is a different matter entirely which I wont get into because I dont want to make a big post longer.

You still have the choice in this current version, but it is an illusion of a choice, afterall if you make something so bad that it isnt even worth considering then it can barely be called a choice at all can it?

What? Where did you get this from?

I have the exact opposite sensation, that in the old c-rpg the differences in gear/levels were so huge that some people just rolled servers by themselves simply due to time played, whilst today I can happily troll around in peasant gear and still come away with 8-1 scores (if I don't get shot to pieces, but owait, friendly archers were even more silly powerful in the old version...)

"If you don't have atleast medium armor and a nice heirloomed poleaxe/big 2 hander sword you are a waste in melee"

Now this is the biggest pile of bullshit I've seen in quite a while, we both know that there are a huge number of fighting styles around now and people are performing well with everything from scimitars to mauls.

Either you are just being extremely nostalgic, or the average player used to suck so much back them that you could just roll everyone regardless of gear provided that you at least had the brainpower of a cabbage. And I find that quite unlikely.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Kafein on December 18, 2011, 12:51:07 pm
I know the balance of old cRPG is terrible, but as I "always" said, when the game is fun and unserious, balance is but a minor problem. New cRPG is like over 9000+ other online arcade (read: no grinding) games, all about a super serious skill contest. Old cRPG was unique in the sense that it mixed a very skill-based gameplay (even with 10+ level differences, a duel ends up with the best player winning), MMO-like grinding (addictive) and an overall fun and trolly atmosphere.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Blondin on December 18, 2011, 12:53:26 pm
I know the balance of old cRPG is terrible, but as I "always" said, when the game is fun and unserious, balance is but a minor problem. New cRPG is like over 9000+ other online arcade (read: no grinding) games, all about a super serious skill contest. Old cRPG was unique in the sense that it mixed a very skill-based gameplay (even with 10+ level differences, a duel ends up with the best player winning), MMO-like grinding (addictive) and an overall fun and trolly atmosphere.

This
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Dezilagel on December 18, 2011, 01:08:11 pm
I know the balance of old cRPG is terrible, but as I "always" said, when the game is fun and unserious, balance is but a minor problem. New cRPG is like over 9000+ other online arcade (read: no grinding) games, all about a super serious skill contest. Old cRPG was unique in the sense that it mixed a very skill-based gameplay (even with 10+ level differences, a duel ends up with the best player winning), MMO-like grinding (addictive) and an overall fun and trolly atmosphere.

The "super serious" part is more of a player issue, especially noticeable in strat.

But I don't think you have the same perspective as me on these things.

As a new player, the fact that skill was the major decider of the outcome of a (melee) battle was what allowed me to quickly get into the game, and get good at it. If I had never had the chance of duelling against some of the best players on a roughly equal playing field, but would have been forced to always play in the shadow of the sick grinders then I would have never been able to develop, get into a clan and do all the stuff that is *fun* for me in this game.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Kafein on December 18, 2011, 03:06:59 pm
The "super serious" part is more of a player issue, especially noticeable in strat.

But I don't think you have the same perspective as me on these things.

As a new player, the fact that skill was the major decider of the outcome of a (melee) battle was what allowed me to quickly get into the game, and get good at it. If I had never had the chance of duelling against some of the best players on a roughly equal playing field, but would have been forced to always play in the shadow of the sick grinders then I would have never been able to develop, get into a clan and do all the stuff that is *fun* for me in this game.

(click to show/hide)


Of course the playing field is not equal. But that only makes defeating someone that has better gear more satisfying, and being killed by the same guy less frustrating. The thing is, winning or loosing only has minor consequences with the old system. Sometimes you even have to team up against some players. An uneven playing field creates "boss" players which are challenging to kill (but certainly not impossible within 10 levels up or down, at least when it's not HA vs melee). Even playing fields become dull very fast (2011 cRPG shows this). 2011 cRPG is like a medieval CS, in every possible meaning.

2010 cRPG allows the player to be a peasant during a decent amount of time, learning the game without having to be effective. It doesn't throw the player into the battle with full potential and full responsibility. At first, the goals when you play are modest (surviving, landing a hit...) then when you catch up with medium levels, you start making kills consistently, but high level enemies are still a challenge. When you reach the higher levels, then you'll always find people that are either better or with better stats than you, but you have good chances against most of the playerbase. Of course, this also comes with a "duty" of actually being effective (autobalance takes level into account, high levels will be outnumbered). What is good is that you always have people with better stats and lesser stats than you, increasing the diversity of battles. Some are easy, some a though. But skill always remains the most important factor.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Xant on December 18, 2011, 03:17:42 pm
That's how it's still like, only it doesn't take take months of no-lifing to be roughly as effective as the top level guys.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: BlackMilk on December 18, 2011, 03:27:47 pm
But skill always remains the most important factor.
false.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Nessaj on December 18, 2011, 03:28:11 pm
There's some aspects of the old cRPG that's good and all, no doubt about it, for example I would prefer the old XP/GOLD (or even the area one) over multiplier, because multiplier makes people quit as soon as they drop down to x1, or they due to having it for ages no matter how good they do due to auto team (im)balance - absolute banner balance would no doubt fix that though.

BUT, in essence the old cRPG is nothing else than a chance to truly have an overpowered character, either on levels, gear or what not. 100% that most people who prefer it do it for the sole reason of being able to stomp a lot of people with worse gear, specs or level, once you've retired a bunch of times, got the WPF far up, got a bunch of levels etc, the game becomes incredibly unbalanced, yes you can still beat a high level overpowered guy, but that is not due to a level playing field IN ANY WAY, it is due to those people sucking, so obviously they suck even more in new cRPG with a level playing field.

IMO the only reason to play the old cRPG for real is because you do not like an equal playing field.

Not that the current cRPG is flawless, hey what game is though, but so far I haven't seen a single good suggestion anywhere - ever - that could solve the XP/Gold system properly. Pioneer work gentlemen.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Gurnisson on December 18, 2011, 03:45:18 pm
IMO the only reason to play the old cRPG for real is because you do not like an equal playing field.

It's not as serious, which brings more fun. At least that's my opinion of it.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Xant on December 18, 2011, 03:52:45 pm
How is it not as serious as new c-RPG? I think it's all about how serious you make it, you don't have to take the new one seriously either.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: slothscott on December 18, 2011, 03:56:02 pm
Although there is still incentive to win no multiplier just makes it feel more relaxed.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: BlindGuy on December 18, 2011, 05:22:09 pm
check the poll results before 'a lot of players etc..'
It's sitting at 40% prefer classic coke, warts and all. The other 60% had no clue how to play a peasant anyway, and would rather play a more cerebral (i.e. tailored for slow thinkers) game like chess :P

lol that you compare muscle memory and twitch reaction to chess...
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Xant on December 18, 2011, 05:23:10 pm
M&B combat system rewards good thinking as much as twitch reactions and muscle memory.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Konrax on December 18, 2011, 05:31:38 pm
I kind of wish that the new crpg was a lot more like the old one in that:

The gold rate needs to me 10-20% it is now, so that you actually have to save up to get good gear, but the upkeep should also be 10-20% of what it is now.

Same exact thing, just it takes a bit longer to get the fancy equipment like in old crpg. When I played that I remember saving up for days to buy studded undercoat and thinking that hey, now I actually count on the battlefield.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: SixThumbs on December 18, 2011, 05:38:41 pm
Old cRPG sounds like whoever plays the most gets to play the game like single-player Warband; riding around fully armored with a 120+ length sword on a horse mindlessly swinging at enemies who have no chance of hitting or hurting you as everyone else bunches into a herd.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: SixThumbs on December 18, 2011, 05:41:13 pm
I kind of wish that the new crpg was a lot more like the old one in that:

The gold rate needs to me 10-20% it is now, so that you actually have to save up to get good gear, but the upkeep should also be 10-20% of what it is now.

Same exact thing, just it takes a bit longer to get the fancy equipment like in old crpg. When I played that I remember saving up for days to buy studded undercoat and thinking that hey, now I actually count on the battlefield.

That sounds all well and good. Did you think of what would happen if that would be implemented right now? I'd be sitting around with all my high-tier items while anyone who's starting gets some change thrown at them every once and a while, oh, and I pay less taxes.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Zisa on December 18, 2011, 06:04:38 pm
Old cRPG sounds like whoever plays the most gets to play the game like single-player Warband; riding around fully armored with a 120+ length sword on a horse mindlessly swinging at enemies who have no chance of hitting or hurting you as everyone else bunches into a herd.
Sigh.. and this sounds like the uninformed opinion of someone who has not tried it.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Loar Avel on December 18, 2011, 06:16:33 pm
Old CRPG is fun, because now it's paysan war, and a lot of player can't do anything without their heavy lordly armor and masterwork weapon.

Their soo easier to kill   :twisted:


I also prefer the old XP/GOLD, tick is good, but XP and gold indexed on the number of death is more rewarding.
We should use the old way for Xp and gold, but for the fight happening in all the map.


Except that... New is much better, balanced etc, etc, etc...




Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: SixThumbs on December 18, 2011, 06:22:34 pm
It is a largely uninformed opinion because I never played it and I can imagine it wasn't as "serious" because of the novelty of a persistent online character for Warband and the ability to try that out with others as a test run. As it stands now I came into the mod having fun just leveling for the sake of it, then after a few generations, learning the underlying mechanics and becoming annoyed with them when they didn't work out in my favor I've simply moved back to the game for what a game should be (to me); a fun diversion.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Dezilagel on December 18, 2011, 08:34:13 pm
I like how Kesh the now level 35 archer and no doubt the single most OP char in the old days -1's every single pro-new/anti-old c-rpg post...

But skill always remains the most important factor.
false.

Especially the -1 on this one made me laugh.

Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: cmp on December 18, 2011, 08:44:53 pm
I like how Kesh the now level 35 archer and no doubt the single most OP char in the old days -1's every single pro-new/anti-old c-rpg post...

Haters gonna hate.

Edit: since people seem to have misunderstood (looking at votes), the hater is not Dezilagel.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Remy on December 18, 2011, 08:51:35 pm
 :lol:
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on December 18, 2011, 09:09:27 pm
I like how Kesh the now level 35 archer and no doubt the single most OP char in the old days -1's every single pro-new/anti-old c-rpg post...

Kesh did not -1 me  :lol:
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bartlomiey on December 18, 2011, 09:16:15 pm
+1 to old one!
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: The_Angle on December 18, 2011, 09:29:38 pm
Don't worry I usually go around 1+ posts with -1 Anyways.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Konrax on December 18, 2011, 09:35:13 pm
That sounds all well and good. Did you think of what would happen if that would be implemented right now? I'd be sitting around with all my high-tier items while anyone who's starting gets some change thrown at them every once and a while, oh, and I pay less taxes.

Lol yeah I did think about that, since it is the obvious conclusion after recommending a change would be implementing it.

It honestly can't be done right now unless everyone gets to keep their heirlooms, all gold is reduced to 10-20%, and all items non-heirloomed are taken at full value and refunded for 10-20% their cash value.

That way at least heirlooms would remain the same, the rest of the gear would need to be repurchased.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: KaMiKaZe_JoE on December 18, 2011, 11:26:50 pm
Played old crpg--wasn't as fun as the new one to me.

Just my opinion. Funny, how this is such a fucking subjective thing--what game you prefer--and yet copious quantities of mentally deficient people persist in treating the subject as if their personal preference stands as a pillar of objective truth.

Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on December 18, 2011, 11:37:58 pm
Just my opinion. Funny, how this is such a fucking subjective thing--what game you prefer--and yet copious quantities of mentally deficient people persist in treating the subject as if their personal preference stands as a pillar of objective truth.

Yup, hence why I said "not my cup of tea." Personal preferences and such.

You left out the "nerf cav" part though  :wink:
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Zisa on December 18, 2011, 11:56:54 pm
This.

I'll swing by when you all finally level up grind and get real crap to defend yourselves with, otherwise I don't see the point in performing mass murder when I can do the same in strategus... Also, I'm still waiting for this tale of "Tears trust me, being a peasant is so much more fun!" I'm watching, waiting, looking, observing... I don't see it. You mean more people are low level and with no gear and thus you can have more peasant fights? Great, another start-of-strategus flashback...

New cRPG for me. I can see the appeal for others, but for me old cRPG is simply not my cup of tea.
Yes, claim how awesome you would be, then not show up. Wanker.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on December 19, 2011, 12:01:57 am
Yes, claim how awesome you would be, then not show up. Wanker.

Even the worst archer will do fine when nobody can afford any shields or armour. Strategus kind of proved that low level gold favours archery more then other classes.

Atm classic crpg is almost unplayable as the all the new crpg archer are creaming themselves at how easy it was back then. Maybe better armour and a shield would make it better but its not fun right now.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bobthehero on December 19, 2011, 12:58:37 am
Buy a gambeson, its the plate armor of peasants.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Zisa on December 19, 2011, 02:11:01 am
Even the worst archer will do fine when nobody can afford any shields or armour. Strategus kind of proved that low level gold favours archery more then other classes.
People are dropping shields for others at spawn. Don't bring strat which has no bearing on this into it you straw grabber.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Tears of Destiny on December 19, 2011, 02:21:13 am
People are dropping shields for others at spawn. Don't bring strat which has no bearing on this into it you straw grabber.

I think it was a good example. I quit playing because it was ludicrous how fast people were shooting and how crazy even one archer was. granted, there was only a dozen and a half people on, but still. The 50 cut loony toons axe is lulzy though, I admit, as well as no one being above level 20.
Title: Re: Classic vs New cRPG
Post by: Bobthehero on December 19, 2011, 03:23:38 am
Tydeus is high than 20/20