cRPG

cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Game Balance Discussion => Topic started by: Torben on February 08, 2012, 11:42:40 am

Title: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Torben on February 08, 2012, 11:42:40 am
the balancing has come a far way,  and I think we can say that the different cav classes are well  balanced against each other now.  I would like your opinion on this.

Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Torben on February 08, 2012, 07:19:44 pm
the "no" voters want to elaborate?  any well trained one and twohander is as high and depending on map and equipment higher threat than a lancer.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Digglez on February 08, 2012, 07:37:02 pm
as a very good 1h cav, I can hold my own while several lancers come at me, so I'd say its fine.  You dont see alot of 2h'ers just because they are more vulnerable while on horseback.

There still needs to be a reason to use light, regular & couch only lances though
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Penitent on February 08, 2012, 07:53:05 pm
I think the different cav classes are balanced. 
yes, some of the lances themselves can use some tweaks (great lance) but overall "lance cav" is a balanced and viable class, just like 1h and 2h cav.

Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Torben on February 08, 2012, 08:21:41 pm
Although intrigued by the idea of balancing lances internally,  I dont see why a big fuzz is made out of it.

People like the italian sword better than the simple sword for obvious reasons,  its just as if I as a polearm cav would start whining that the former should be made a viable option to the latter,  aside of money.

what.  the.  fuck.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Xol! on February 08, 2012, 08:27:14 pm
As a lifelong cav/infantry player (I've picked 2h cav because I like playing 2h on the ground), 2h cav is inferior to both lancers and 1h cav.  There's really nothing that a 2h cav player can do that a 1h cav player can't do better.  Since 2h cav takes a pretty hefty (~25% to both speed and damage) nerf when used on horseback, can't use a shield, and has no real reach advantage on the majority of the 2h weapons useable on horseback, there's no real reason to go that route (unless, like me, you really, really like 2h weapons).

In all honesty, that suits me just fine, as it keeps the number of 2h cav players down and I never have to worry about my class being nerfed.  However, I'd like to see some of the old 2h cav weapons brought back for some variety.  The bar mace/long iron mace/studded warclub for example, were originally removed because they had crushthrough (almost 100% crushthrough chance when used on horseback).  Now that they don't, there's no reason for them not to be used on horseback again.

I don't want to sound like I'm complaining, because I'm not.  I like 2h cav the way it is.  It's plenty viable, and its ground game is way more fun (to me).  BUT, if you take the same player, put them in a generic lancer, 1h cav, and 2h cav build, the lancer and 1h cav will outperform the 2h cav 90% of the time.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Torben on February 08, 2012, 08:47:24 pm
Quote from: Xolvern on February 08, 2012, 08:27:14 pm
...

I hole heartedly agree,  and was inclined to not even mention 2h cav here.  two things made me reconsider:

1:  being highly effective when dehorsed,

2)  that insane cataphrac/morningstar bashibazuk. kastamanulu iirc.  he seems more effective than any lancer or 1h but reyiz out there atm,  maybe due to his heavy load out,  but he shows that its a viable option.  if one can do it,  many can.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Penitent on February 08, 2012, 09:11:54 pm
Quote from: Xolvern on February 08, 2012, 08:27:14 pm
As a lifelong cav/infantry player (I've picked 2h cav because I like playing 2h on the ground), 2h cav is inferior to both lancers and 1h cav. 

I think you ended your own debate. :)  2h cav is not inferior than 1h or lancer cav, because it can be better on the ground...when you are inevitably de-horsed.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Tzar on February 08, 2012, 09:41:56 pm
Lancers are the best an most easy class to play both on foot and on horseback i miss my old lancer build.

1h cav is medicore at best unless u ride a armored war tank like reyiz an can charge into everything...

2h cav... well i dunno lol its been a long time since i played that imho is viable if u ride like cataphrac/morningstar bashibazuk. kastamanulu

Lancers are cheap an effective while 1h/2h cav needs a bigger horse to take some punishment closing the gab between you an your target where as lancers can do lightning fast charges in an out an have great reach..

Hands down lancers win the day.. not everyone have sold their mom an daugthers to afford riding heavy armored war horses playing as 1h/2h cav  :lol:

Anyways about the poll i guess u can say all classes are viable but i would say lancers are the best option if you wanna be cav
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Torben on February 08, 2012, 09:46:35 pm
Quote from: Tzar on February 08, 2012, 09:41:56 pm
...

disagree.  mobility is of highest value with weapon range decreasing.  its a given that a tank helps,  but 1h/2h on an arab are very deadyl,  against inf and cav alike. 
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Tzar on February 08, 2012, 09:49:58 pm
Quote from: Torben on February 08, 2012, 09:46:35 pm
disagree.  mobility is of highest value with weapon range decreasing.  its a given that a tank helps,  but 1h/2h on an arab are very deadyl,  against inf and cav alike.

You can attack alot more targets as a lancer then a 1h/2h cav player if using a light horse go ahead respec an try out 1h or 2h cav an comeback an tell me its more easy picking targets  :lol:
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Gnjus on February 08, 2012, 09:55:32 pm
What Tzar is trying to say is that Lancer has a chance against aware opponent while 1h/2h cav......hardly. They mostly pick off their targets from behind or bump 'em while they're busy fighting. Riding a tank only allows you to make few more mistakes as it can survive some hits while on weaker horses your first mistake is probably the last you'll make for that round.  :wink:
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Torben on February 08, 2012, 09:56:18 pm
Quote from: Tzar on February 08, 2012, 09:49:58 pm
You can attack alot more targets as a lancer then a 1h/2h cav player if using a light horse go ahead respec an try out 1h or 2h cav an comeback an tell me its more easy picking targets  :lol:

I was referring to this:
Quote from: Tzar on February 08, 2012, 09:41:56 pm
1h cav is medicore at best

which i disagree with holeheartedly.  higher damage at lower speeds,  a very dangerous and mulitisituationally applicable bumpslash make them very,  very dangerouse against inf,  and a lancer has to keep his distance strictly when fighting 1h cav to not be outbreaked and cut to peaces.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Casimir on February 08, 2012, 10:14:58 pm
2h cav performs best when dehorsed but can hold its own on horseback.

Lancer cav is by fr the most effective form of cavalry, with far more benifits on both horse and foot than 1h.

As ever, 1h strikes a relatively poor balance, although that arabian cav sword has some super reach, its not great once dismounted.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Stabby_Dave on February 08, 2012, 10:15:23 pm
1h Cav is better  for getting a lot of kills quickly if the enemy is unaware but a good lancer should usually beat a good 1h cav and you are basically useless vs aware polearmers/2handers. The shield makes you more likely to survive if you are dehorsed around a load of enemies. Also, being as you have to get closer to the melee, mistakes are much more common so unless you take a heavy horse, you are likely to die pretty quickly.

Lancers are better all around vs aware and unaware players but cant always rack up as many kills since the recovery time in between lance thrusts is higher than a 1 hander. That said, lancers tend to be more survivable since they dont have to put themselves in as many risky situations.

Finally, 2 hand cav is clearly the worst of the 3 classes since lancers and 1h cav are both generally superior on horseback and even when dismounted, an 18/18 2h cav isnt necessarily better than a 1h/polearm equivalent. As xol said, the only reason to choose 2h cav is for style/fun.

Edit: Ah gnjus beat me to basically all my points.

Quote from: Casimir on February 08, 2012, 10:14:58 pm
As ever, 1h strikes a relatively poor balance, although that arabian cav sword has some super reach, its not great once dismounted.

With a 21/15 build I kill as many people dismounted as I do on a horse with an unloomed arabian cav sword. The high damage means I can 2-3 shot most people. It is slow so I generally dont feint but I get most my kills by just doing a few simple holds.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Xol! on February 08, 2012, 10:24:18 pm
Quote from: Torben on February 08, 2012, 08:47:24 pm
I hole heartedly agree,  and was inclined to not even mention 2h cav here.  two things made me reconsider:

1:  being highly effective when dehorsed,

2)  that insane cataphrac/morningstar bashibazuk. kastamanulu iirc.  he seems more effective than any lancer or 1h but reyiz out there atm,  maybe due to his heavy load out,  but he shows that its a viable option.  if one can do it,  many can.

Oh, 2h cav can be very, very effective, I'm not disputing that.  Any cavalry can be, it's just the nature of the beast.  Just look at Rohypnol and his xbow cav build.  He regularly sits on the top of the scoreboard.  For cavalry play, though, someone who's running a 2h build would generally be better off running a 1h build.  Even with a morningstar, you're just as well off going with a shield, using it with 1h wpf, and taking the '2h as 1h' penalty, because at least you have a shield. 

Can't deny 2h got style though  8-)

Quote from: Garison on February 08, 2012, 09:11:54 pm
I think you ended your own debate. :)  2h cav is not inferior than 1h or lancer cav, because it can be better on the ground...when you are inevitably de-horsed.

Well, the 'best infantry class' debate can rage on, but I think whether or not a player chooses to go 2h cav has more to do with what weapons they like to use, not what's better. 

I guess the best way to put it is this:  You're never going to see a min-maxer or hard-cav player on 2h cav, unless they're horribly, horribly misinformed.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Torben on February 08, 2012, 10:25:13 pm
pole is: "well balanced with individual stregnths and weeknesses,  all of them being a valid option?"

so do the guys who dont see this balance want to contribute by saying how it could be done better?

I dont see need in it.  every class has people performing extremely well,  with similar gear.  that one class draws more players than the other because it has a flatter learning curve,  is not the question at hand.

I do understand the 2h delemma.  still dont see it underpowered,  any class is a killer in capable hands. 
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Xol! on February 08, 2012, 10:29:33 pm
Quote from: Torben on February 08, 2012, 10:25:13 pm
pole is: "well balanced with individual stregnths and weeknesses,  all of them being a valid option?"

so do the guys who dont see this balance want to contribute by saying how it could be done better?

I dont see need in it.  every class has people performing extremely well,  with similar gear.  that one class draws more players than the other because it has a flatter learning curve,  is not the question at hand.

I do understand the 2h delemma.  still dont see it underpowered,  any class is a killer in capable hands.

Definitely.  I like it the way it is.  To be honest, 2h cav shouldn't really be that viable on horseback compared to lances or 1h cav anyway.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Torben on February 08, 2012, 10:30:42 pm
Quote from: Xolvern on February 08, 2012, 10:29:33 pm
Definitely.  I like it the way it is.  To be honest, 2h cav shouldn't really be that viable on horseback compared to lances or 1h cav anyway.

would be nice to give them some sort of bonus tho.  maybe a short crushthrough weapon : )
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Stabby_Dave on February 08, 2012, 10:31:06 pm
Quote from: Torben on February 08, 2012, 10:25:13 pm
pole is: "well balanced with individual stregnths and weeknesses,  all of them being a valid option?"

so do the guys who dont see this balance want to contribute by saying how it could be done better?

I dont see need in it.  every class has people performing extremely well,  with similar gear.  that one class draws more players than the other because it has a flatter learning curve,  is not the question at hand.

I do understand the 2h delemma.  still dont see it underpowered,  any class is a killer in capable hands.

I think re-adding crushthrough on one of the longer 2h weapons would be good, for instance the morning star. However, if possible make it so that the only way it would ever crush through would be if travelling at full speed on one of the faster horses. Therefore you wouldnt get str whores abusing it as infantry. This would create a nice niche sub-class.

OR remove the 2h speed/damage penalty on horseback.

I dont think either would make 2h cav better than lancers or 1h cav but it would bring it more in line.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Vexus on February 08, 2012, 10:32:03 pm
I voted no mostly for the 2h cav.

Since we are talking about mounted combat not ground combat 2h cav is the most disadvantaged here and ALL cav dismounted are viable on ground not only 2h cav.

Secondly they are not balanced because cav with lances have a bigger chance to strike because they don't need to go infront of their enemies but just thrust from far away (Not to mention the possibility of couching which by itself is a major advantage over the other 2).

2h cav are a niche class which I tried and enjoyed but expect to be targeted often by lancers.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Xol! on February 08, 2012, 11:16:43 pm
Quote from: Torben on February 08, 2012, 10:30:42 pm
crushthrough

Quote from: Stabby_Dave on February 08, 2012, 10:31:06 pm
crushthrough or speed/damage buff

Honestly, crushthrough was OP as fuck on horseback.  I played around with it on one of my first 2h cav gens, carrying a shortened military scythe for people without shields and a regular maul (useable on horseback back then) for those with them.  There's just nothing an infantry player can do to avoid getting wrecked.  Granted, this was before the big cav nerf, but I doubt they'll bring it back, much fun as it would be.  I'd love to use my mallet on horseback, even without crushthrough.

I've mentioned tweaking the damage/speed to cmp before, but my impression was that it was impossible change it, before WSE was implemented, because it's a hardcoded feature.  Maybe it's possible now that WSE is part of cRPG.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Stabby_Dave on February 08, 2012, 11:53:58 pm
I think that if it was possible at high speeds only (ruling out heavy horse crush-throughers) then it could be pretty balanced since you will still be pretty much useless against any aware 2h/polearmers.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Jarlek on February 09, 2012, 12:47:50 am
When I retire I am gonna make a 1h/2h/polearm cav with pretty even distribution of wpf (not decided completel yet). Obviously it wont be the same as a full single-wpf build, but it should be pretty good to judge. I'll post a recap on how the all work on horse compared to each other when I'm close to retiring that gen.

Kinda looking forward to the Morningstar&shield on horseback :D Although I'm still unsure about the shield :/
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Torben on February 09, 2012, 01:01:22 am
Quote from: Zapper on February 09, 2012, 12:47:50 am
...

mate,  I know you know your self around,  just wanted to remember you to consider that every class requires completely different playstyles. 

So it wont be easy to do a fair comparison,  as your former experiences, as well as the easier accessibility of basic lancing,  will probably cloud judgement a bit . )
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Jarlek on February 09, 2012, 01:51:57 am
Quote from: Torben on February 09, 2012, 01:01:22 am
mate,  I know you know your self around,  just wanted to remember you to consider that every class requires completely different playstyles. 

So it wont be easy to do a fair comparison,  as your former experiences, as well as the easier accessibility of basic lancing,  will probably cloud judgement a bit . )
Yeah, I know. Although having them all at the same time ought to count for something when you compare them. As I said, I'll come back and write a wrap up of what I learned/think when I'm done with that gen, ok?
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Torben on February 09, 2012, 04:51:53 am
lookin forward to it chap
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Toffi on February 09, 2012, 01:20:04 pm
Hey Torben, my main is a lancer, my alt a 1h cav.

I was enjoying the 1h cav using the morningstar before it got nerfed 1 1/2h years ago, but now, in my opinion, lancers are just much better cause of their range.

They have no problems killing other 1h or 2h horsemen, and its also easier to kill aware infantry charging head-on than with a 1h swrod, which is much shorter.

Edit: When you are dismounted, you are better of with a 1h and a shield in your hand than a lance :D So this is a + for the 1 h cav. But I still think it's unbalanced.
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Tzar on February 09, 2012, 06:25:08 pm
Quote from: CrazyCracka420 on February 09, 2012, 06:21:20 pm
This:

lancer

Vroom vroom
(click to show/hide)

This is 1h/2h cav:

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: 1hcav, 2hcav and lancers
Post by: Spawny on February 09, 2012, 06:36:05 pm
Quote from: Toffi on February 09, 2012, 01:20:04 pm
Edit: When you are dismounted, you are better of with a 1h and a shield in your hand than a lance :D So this is a + for the 1 h cav. But I still think it's unbalanced.

If you get a chance to get up. When dehorsed by a lancer, you're now 1h/shield infantry against a lancer cav.

On a side note, it feels that it takes longer before a 1h with shield can start blocking when getting up compared with polearmers without a shield. Not sure if that's true, or if that's just my subjective observation.