Yeah, pretty much any range would decimate a fully piked out army, imo, though it would be interesting to see!
Massing Pikes/Long Spears in Strat is not a new thing by any means, it happened greatly last Strat too with Long Spears and that was when they were 2slot, balanced and could overhead so they were quite a bit better than the ones now. They aren't the end all weapon and they have some easy counters (Like shielders with fast weapons). The only reason they are so good is that the length allows them to stay back and not get by other weapons so you have to negate that advantage by getting up close, don't try and skirmish with people who have more pikes because you let their length advantage be used to its fullest extent.
This is why i had made a thread asking to nerf pikes in game balance. Pikes are so OP that soon every army will just be massing pikes and there will be no balance to the game. Pikes in this game have all of the advantages they had in real life and none of the crippling disadvantages that made them unusable outside of highland warfare. Pikes had never been popular before so i assume the devs paid no attention to its OPness, but now that its becoming so popular and having such a negative effect on strat i think it can no longer be ignored. I guarantee if every army starts massing pikes and this game becomes mount and blade: pike wars (which will happen) that pikes will be nerfed.
Some of you say archers are the answer, you have not been in these battles and do not know what your talking about, with their heavy armor the arrows do very little to stop them, and they have some sheilders protecting them. We would need to have more archers than they have people for that strategy to be at all effective. Any type of infantry is also innefective, the second u put your gaurd down to attack the guy in front of you there are 30 people behind and around him who are in range to stab you and can do so because they can magically stab you through their team mates. Plus as i said they have sheilders at the front so downblock doesnt work at all, you can block the pike stabs and get overheaded by their steel picks or whatever they use. Chaos is the only clan really doing this right now, but lljk will probabbly follow suit and it seems hospitaller is also making pikes from what i heard about yesterdays battle. If we ever end up fighting the Europeans they will probably adopt the strategy too, or they may do it on their own unless they don't believe what has been said here.
Pikes had never been popular before so i assume the devs paid no attention to its OPness
Some of you say archers are the answer, you have not been in these battles and do not know what your talking about, with their heavy armor the arrows do very little to stop them, and they have some sheilders protecting them. We would need to have more archers than they have people for that strategy to be at all effective.
Any type of infantry is also innefective, the second u put your gaurd down to attack the guy in front of you there are 30 people behind and around him who are in range to stab you and can do so because they can magically stab you through their team mates.
Plus as i said they have sheilders at the front so downblock doesnt work at all...
...you can block the pike stabs and get overheaded by their steel picks or whatever they use.
In all the battles ive been in almost all of our infantry was sheild infantry, we form a sheild wall and attack their mob of infantry infront of us, getting close does absolutely nothing. As i said the second you drop your shield your open to being attacked by almost anyone on their team given they mostly have pikes. Not only that the guys in the front have sheids. So basically you open up and hit someoens sheild, only to be simultaneously stabbed to death by 5-6 people. If pikers couldnt stab thru team mates or stab people who are 5ft infront of them with a 30 ft weapon it would be better but w/e.
Chaos is the only clan really doing this right now, but lljk will probabbly follow suit and it seems hospitaller is also making pikes from what i heard about yesterdays battle. If we ever end up fighting the Europeans they will probably adopt the strategy too, or they may do it on their own unless they don't believe what has been said here.
tl;dr A diverse army that works together fares better than a specialized force.
Damn. That's a bloody good read!(click to show/hide)
In all the battles ive been in almost all of our infantry was sheild infantry, we form a sheild wall and attack their mob of infantry infront of us, getting close does absolutely nothing. As i said the second you drop your shield your open to being attacked by almost anyone on their team given they mostly have pikes. Not only that the guys in the front have sheids. So basically you open up and hit someoens sheild, only to be simultaneously stabbed to death by 5-6 people. If pikers couldnt stab thru team mates or stab people who are 5ft infront of them with a 30 ft weapon it would be better but w/e.
From a realism perspective saying that scottish highlanders were the only ones who ever used pike formations is just retarded. It's something that was used since at least ancient bronze age warfare. The spanish tercio, landsknecht, swiss pike formation are prob the closest contemporary (for the period Warband mirrors) examples. And even then, having a long polearm in the second rank stabbing/attacking over a frontline of shielders is a no-brainer. You know what, just read this, it's wiki i know, but cba to look up other sources for obvious stuff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pike_%28weapon%29
When did i say pikes were only used by scottish highlanders, look at my thread in balance to get my full history take. At any rate i meant highland or mountain warfare, you mentioned the scotts and the swiss, which means you agree with me. You also mention bronze age warfare, yes i know about that, and its really my whole point in the history part of my nerf thread. Pike walls are a bronze age tactic that were rendered useless by the advent of professional armies (the Romans) using sword and sheild infantry who could get in close and render the pikes useless.
I even posted links to some of these battles between the roman legions and these pike wall or phalanx formations, the Romans won basically all of these battles and in two of them had kill to death ratios of 25:1 and 50:1 despite being outnumbered (these were very large battles too). I took this historical evidence and provided a rationale for why pikes were not effective to prove why they should not be so effective here. Some of the biggest defeats in military history have come from pitting an army of pikes/phalanx against sword and shield infantry and yet doing that wins you battles in strategous? Its the same thing as if the game was messed up so badly that an army of cavalry could destroy an army of pikemen effortlessly.
As far as the other comments about game play. The way i see it, its a bunch of people (the ones who mass pikes) saying that pikes are not OP and are easy to stop (which is why they use them), and they would know that pikes are easy to stop seeing as the people they fight against do not use pikes. Wait what?
Pikes and other weapons are not static objects and thats unfortunate, but you can still adjust the minimum attack range in the code, that needs to be done. You can also slow down the movement speed of those who use pikes, it has been done to a very small extent, it needs to be done more. The lawl-stabbing needs to be doen away with on all weapons, everyone seems to agree with that. The bunny hopping needs to be disabled when using a pike, and it can be done (i would want this done on alot of other weapons too, but pikers seem to be the only ones who do it). If you want to agrue agaisnt these changes read my rationale for them in my nerf thread. At any rate, when it comes to making a weapon balanced instead of realistic or historically accurate, this changes would make the pike balanced.
A pike is a weapon that was designed in an extreme way to do one job, and do it very well, that being to stop cavalry. Balance is not taking a weapon meant to do one thing, and changeing it in all kind of absurd ways so that it can do EVERYTHING well. With that kind of thought why dont we take throwing rocks, which suck, and "balance" them by filling them with gunpowder so that they function as gernades. That way rocks wont suck anymore. If something like a pike does one thing SO well as it does stopping cavalry, its already balanced, its aptitude of stopping cavalry offsets how much it SHOULD suck against infantry.
And if you say "balanced" armies win battles, i would think you all would be for this. I would not consider a "balanced" and "diverse" army as you describe it, to be an army made of two different unit types. With these changes, you would still have some pikes for stopping cav, its just not 80% of your infantry would have them. This opens the door for other unit types to replace those pikers making your army truly diverse and balanced. At any rate now that the Knights of new and TKOV have gotten into the action, its 4 vs 1 in strat now, you dont need OP pikes anymore.
And remember, if something (the pike) gets nerfed over, and over, and over, and over again, then its probably OP.
Why pikes should not be so good:
Pikes were so long and heavy pike men/phalanx moved extremely slow.
If infantry got past the spear points and in close to the pikers, the pikes were useless, they had to drop their pikes and fight with their side sword, if they had one.
Pikes were so long and heavy that when flanked they could not turn to their left or right to face their attackers, they had to drop their pikes and use their side sword, if they had one.
Pikes were so long and heavy that when flanked from behind they could not turn around face their attackers, they had to drop their pikes and use their side sword, if they had one.
Pikes had no maneuverability or flexibility as soldiers/a military unit.
All of this was made worse by the fact that they typically wore very light armor because of how heavy the pikes themselves were, the very most elite pikemen could wear heavier armor, but the vast majority could not.
Pike walls were only useful in exactly one scenario, if the enemy was in front of them and they were able to keep them at bay, meaning the enemy did not have shields, or did not have the discipline to advance whole heartily into the pike wall. Yes some may be stabbed or even killed while doing so, but that's what professional soldiers do, and when they get in they slaughter the pikers.
Also, in the case of Pikes, good throwers are probably the most effective answer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD-MPoqmt_M
Also, in the case of Pikes, good throwers are probably the most effective answer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD-MPoqmt_MSo many throwers! I feel so lonely in EU. Please come visit!
Unlike the Hospitallers, the Green Faction's armies claim fiefs for ourselves. We don't let one super-power take all the glory and then sanction off fiefs to others, lmfao.
When is Hospitaller going to let ATS, or LL lead one of their armies that they keep funding and single-handedly take a Fief for themselves? They won't.
While this isn't every player you guys employ, Lemmy, what I've noticed about your ranged is somewhat bad target prioritizing, along with awful tunnel vision. One Hospitaller archer who I won't name shot at me, a Crossbowman, for five minutes after he landed one shot on me! It is never, ever wise to chase a kill to that extent when there are more important targets (infantry). You don't win the "ranged war" by shooting their ranged with your ranged, you win it by being better at shooting their infantry!
Also, in the case of Pikes, good throwers are probably the most effective answer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD-MPoqmt_M
So you merc for the greens but they dont do anything to help KUTT, doesn't sound like an alliance to me, sounds like your just mercs. They should give you Uslum back its not nice to use people like tools. We have give occitan their land back and they would do the same for us, in fact they are doing it tonight, thats a real alliance.
In all the battles ive been in almost all of our infantry was sheild infantry, we form a sheild wall and attack their mob of infantry infront of us, getting close does absolutely nothing. As i said the second you drop your shield your open to being attacked by almost anyone on their team given they mostly have pikes. Not only that the guys in the front have sheids. So basically you open up and hit someoens sheild, only to be simultaneously stabbed to death by 5-6 people. If pikers couldnt stab thru team mates or stab people who are 5ft infront of them with a 30 ft weapon it would be better but w/e.
This is exactly why we should be able to stab while holding the shield partially in front of us. We should not have to position the shield completely out of the way to strike. The Roman legion used this by locking shields and stabbing in between them with their short sword while advancing. It was very successful.
Everyone chill out.
And for the record I don't think we look down on any clans in our alliance, We would gladly help LL, ATS or any other clan that wanted a village, Our goal in the war was not to claim every village for our own amusement, it was simply a backhand result of being attacked by the green alliance. We never intended on over reaching. As for our clan, we do have a numch of active members and that is why you see at least half our roster as Hospitallers most nights, that might be why you think we are over-glorifying? I don't know about that one.. I don't see us anywhere beating our chest as solo Hospitallers, But rather cheering on the "Red army" and any who pick up arms with us.
And both sides are fed by their respected allies.. kind of what alliances are for are they not? We (Hospitallers) are very self sufficient, and as I see it are not as reliant on other clans as those on the green side of the fence..We do get help from time to time and appreciate it. Just my opinion tho.
Is this a joke? You say throwers are the answer to defeating an ARMY of pikemen with sheilders protecting them and you post a video of 5, maybe more throwers gang raping one pike-man on the battle server. 5 on 1 and any class would be effective. So i guess if our army was all throwers, and our army outnumbered the pike-man army 5-1 we would win? Yeah... even then those throwers had to hit the pike-man atelast 10 times to kill him, not very effective.
Aye, KUTT will get back their village if they want it, we prefer our coastal villages, much too cold in the east :P Fiefs are gonna change owners many times in this war, just a matter of who is available to attack a fief. KUTT has been a great ally to the Green, and more then deserves it
prefer to hide in the back. I see
only to come out of the darkness to suckle the tit of the green poop stain cows.
prefer to hide in the back. I see
only to come out of the darkness to suckle the tit of the green poop stain cows.
Every tactic, every class, every plan, every strategy has a weakness. It's not up to the devs to nerf something because you didn't want to examine your enemy's strategy and find this weakness. (I mean this for more than just the pike formations, and I'm not aiming this at anyone in particular, so don't go getting defensive. :wink:) If there is a gamebreaking imbalance, as there used to be with the longspear and pike, THEN it is up to the devs to fix it, currently I would personally say the game is quite well balanced.
Totally agree. I'd also say the game is pretty well balanced and that the dev's should focus their energy on improving the game, and making strategus work. Nothing in my opinion is so game breaking or unbalanced that it needs to be nerfed (or needs something buffed to counter it). I've been saying the same thing for a while now, everything has a counter. It's up to the players (and commanders) to take advantage of their strengths, and to try and exploit their enemies weaknesses.
tl; dr version: stop nerfing shit for the ADD/WoW generation of gamer.
Can someone explain to me whats the point of going 2h when polearms do a way better job at the same thing?I know alot of people (including myself) use 2h. I just use it, cause I feel like a proper warrior with it. But the polearm does a better job. Its longer, does more dam, speed is about the same and most of em break shields. So why is 2h in general still existant :?:
Can someone explain to me whats the point of going 2h when polearms do a way better job at the same thing?I know alot of people (including myself) use 2h. I just use it, cause I feel like a proper warrior with it. But the polearm does a better job. Its longer, does more dam, speed is about the same and most of em break shields. So why is 2h in general still existant :?:
So many throwers! I feel so lonely in EU. Please come visit!You're not even a thrower, lolz, besides, if you go EU_3 odds are you'll have a jarrid or a throwing lance from Zlisch hittin' you at some annoying spot.
You're not even a thrower, lolz, besides, if you go EU_3 odds are you'll have a jarrid or a throwing lance from Zlisch hittin' you at some annoying spot.Lolwut? Dude, I'm a thrower. Retired and I'm already lvl 29 with my 7 PT...
Lolwut? Dude, I'm a thrower. Retired and I'm already lvl 29 with my 7 PT...I've only ever seen you as a horse-guy, either lancer or sword-dude don't remember, think it was Jarlek the Blueman or something, btw BUFF HT!
I've only ever seen you as a horse-guy, either lancer or sword-dude don't remember, think it was Jarlek the Blueman or something, btw BUFF HT!That was the gen before. It wasn't a lancer or a 1h cav. It was a 1h/2h/pole shielder cavalry build. Frighteningly effective!
I've only ever seen you as a horse-guy, either lancer or sword-dude don't remember, think it was Jarlek the Blueman or something, btw BUFF HT!
POWER TO THE HT!!!Throwing really needs a buff :( I hate it when archers take 3 throwing axes to die :(