Slow me down, terrain penalties and rain clogging me boots reducing the effectiveness of athletics. It's usually the high STR low INT build players that have a problem with foot work. Combined with the added delays to the swings it makes dancing more difficult then it need be and forces a disadvantage versus cavalry as attacks are more telegraphed, and it makes it easier for cav to run you over without getting hit. Also, back when the 2h swings got this millstone delay there was some mention of 'good things are coming as a result' - I have not noticed these yet, maybe I am slow.
Read the whole thing. I agree with you on pretty much everything, but what is the point of this post. I mean, what do you want to change? Or do you just want to tell people what you think :?Just textualising what may be on some people's minds. There is always the hope some dev will read it and maybe explore some possibilities.
Some of your points are good, but I really can't accept this :Well I regretfully must put you in the high str low int group then, because I disagree with you.
Characters in cRPG lack any kind of inertia, except when you wear super heavy armor with a str build. Due to this, dancing is extremely effective, and it shouldn't.
Well I regretfully must put you in the high str low int group then, because I disagree with you.
Historical Simulation wankers - lets not forget them, they always show up to voice their opinions on historical accuracy. So I guess it is more of a multiple personality and not just split.
Now Warband itself at it's core is an action game. Unfortunately, Taleworlds wanted to maintain it's fanbase which was not as narrow as a strictly action game would be. Thus we have khergits and horse archery.
From an RTS/histerical wanker view, these fit.
From an 'action' viewpoint these were always a headache to 'try' to balance into the game world.
Face it, here is a class of character with the ability to never get within range of the enemy while inflicting damage. It is fun in single player to circle jerk vast hordes of enemies and constantly hit your loot trunk to reload on arrows.
From a multiplayer 'action' viewpoint, it's one of the stupidest things ever. Seriously, most of the time I feel we may as well have that guy on the flying carpet shooting fireballs from the sky.
Most of the chars I play have 18 agi or more. My main is 15/21. My problem is not being high STR, it's hating the footwork paradigm that imposed itself over the melee combat as player skill improved. And hating the now quite abundant fake peasants with 8 ATH that are both barely catchable for infantry because they are too fast and for cavalry because in this game you can sprint in one direction and instantly make a 90 degree turn without failing terribly like any human being, or even slowing down.Yikes!
I suggest adding at least 10 units of weight to nude characters, to reduce this sillyness.
Don't get me wrong, I think the agi/str balance is ok at the moment. But everyone is generally too agile. You might even speed up the game if a fixed weight is added to all characters, to make up for it.
Yikes!
Well my 8 ath peasant is more like 6 ath thanks to the stupid weapon choice of flamberge, but that's my own fault.
I question your use of the term sprint, as it looks more like a leisurely stroll or trot to me, and firmly believe the characters are not agile enough. I particularily enjoyed the footwork paradigm, and fondly remember fights with other speed freaks (the first being canary). I had no problem in the long ago past of dying to str monsters such as Wallace, and feel agility (athletics and weapon master) have suffered to the point of being more of a choice for those determined to use that playstyle rather then it being as competitive as a strength build.
And yes I am aware my views are likely coloured by a predisposition to a certain playstyle, but it does seem that every patch has done it's best to eliminate that very style.
Make cRPG being more of a strategy game, than of a skill based "who's got the better reflexes and muscle memory?"-game, and the nerf cries will become fewer.
Changing the default game mode from battle, which is basing on killing the enemy to something different, which bases on holding several points on the map would shift the focus from killing enemies to winning rounds.
Agi builds are very competitive, mostly because today bounces never happen due to the attack being too weak.
I had no problem in the long ago past of dying to str monsters such as Wallace, and feel agility (athletics and weapon master) have suffered to the point of being more of a choice for those determined to use that playstyle rather then it being as competitive as a strength build.
-1
Unrealistic and that's unrewarding to people who actually have skill in the game. Rage cries on realism would increase if this was implemented. Strategy is already present in this game, but best not to go to the extreme of what you're asking.
Unrealistic and that's unrewarding to people who actually have skill in the game.
Rage cries on realism would increase if this was implemented. Strategy is already present in this game, but best not to go to the extreme of what you're asking.
Less combat focused and therefore more boring.
EDIT: +1 to POOPHAMMER. Try a plecostamus (spelling?) they look like small brown long stingrays and eat a lot of the shit in the tank - I still recommend frequent cleaning. Also wave your fingers at them once in a while - they like that.
EDIT 2:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plecostomus
The big phallacy
Typical comment....."uuhhh I want to show how good I am" *looking at my e-pen*
I think the definition of skill in a game with several very different classes fighting each other in two teams goes far beyond just knowing how to block manually.
You can NEVER win a map on your own
I don't see where this is unrealistic. If anything, it improves realism, because most people tend to try to survive a battle, instead of launching suicide charges and going rambo mode.
I think the complete opposite of "less combat focused". It would be a shitload of fun to watch both teams trying to get an advantage over each other. And mind you, it's LESS combat focused, not "not combat focused at all".
which is what warband is - an action game.
From a multiplayer 'action' viewpoint, it's one of the stupidest things ever. Seriously, most of the time I feel we may as well have that guy on the flying carpet shooting fireballs from the sky.
I am fully aware some wont like 'my' solution.(click to show/hide)
Congrats on reading this far, if you didn't AND post tl:dr I am putting you on my list.
I take it you're someone with no skill. Also you're going off the point, I like realism in a game, whereas it seems you don't.
Yeah, obviously. I never said skill is solely defined on a persons ability to manual block.
It's unrealistic as in real life it would be "who's got the better reflexes" that would win the 1v1 majority of the time, if you disagree then clearly detail to me the characteristic that would bring victory in a 1v1 if it is not the reflexes of a player. There is more then just having fast reflexes (like tactics) but you mentioning that this should not be a factor to obtaining victory is stupid.
Holding certain points of the map for a set amount of time to win instead of killing the enemy as you would do in real life, does not make it more "fun to watch" as you'll just be watching each team camp the points on the map to claim victory rather than engaging the enemy for victory, how's that an improvement in realism? After all this game is based on medieval combat, what you're suggesting would minimize the direct combat in the game. Yes you need strategy to win a battle but introducing a new game type to hold and capture points for a certain amount of time and replace the battle game type as the default is not needed.
It's unrealistic as in real life it would be "who's got the better reflexes" that would win the 1v1 majority of the timeNo, not really. Having good reflexes always helps, but no.
I take it you're someone with no skill. Also you're going off the point, I like realism in a game, whereas it seems you don't.
Face it, here is a class of character with the ability to never get within range of the enemy while inflicting damage
It is not like educating children (you deserve to be called a pompous windbag for that, though the label kindergarten mode is often justified) - people either play with their heads up their ass or start to pay attention.
Trying to add artifical methods of promoting team play is akin to pandering to the stupidest players ever, and not required, as I see plenty of good team play as it is.
You don't really want multiplayer, you want bots to follow your commands.
You are indeed part of the problem, worse thing is, you do not see it. 'More of a strategy game' is trying to fit a square peg in a round hole - it's the wrong tool for the job and the materials at hand. So maybe you'd fit right in with people determined to make the game shittier from an action viewpoint (even as merely an unfortunate biproduct of some mad quest to make things more strategic - but who cares right), which is what warband is - an action game.
The big phallacy some are under the influence of, is 'twitch is inferior' and a desire to equate slow play with cerebral play, possibly stemming from a defeat. Can't beat it first try? Heck nerf it!
Could you elaborate this part a bit? I see only assertions, no explanations or reasonings.
Nighttime
Fog
Hilly maps
heavy detailed maps
Possible solutions part 2:
Gold has never and will never be a useful factor in 'balance'. Upkeep really is there to slow new players - kind of a good thing though if they learn a bit before donning the heavy arse armor.
Balancing around strategus - umm, no. Keep the core game at the forefront and make strategus adapt - strategus is RISK, Warband is action. Doing it the backassward way is hurtful to us action junkies.
Elaboration for Joker...
The game is a series of decisions. For some reason, after a wrong decision some players may feel the need to post about a nerf or complain that the game is too fast, hence why we are here. It is downright amusing when the slow of thinking decide the game is too fast because they are unable or unwilling to improve, and usually there is some derision about 'twitch' gaming, the implication that emailing advanced notice of an attack would somehow make the game 'smarter'.
Other people (i.e. people who want to play rather then change the game) say 'shit I died' to themselves, then something like 'hmm, what did I do wrong, how can I prevent that in the future' and continue playing.
It's like saying chess is better then tennis, or football (american not that sissy eu stuff), equating a slowness of action with a greatness of thought.
A regular chess game is much faster than a tennis or footall match, you know...Thanks for your opinion.
<snip>
Now, it's not because the game asks you to make fast decisions that it is more interesting to play. You should stop trying to impose your views on that. I think players like the current speed of the game, some want it faster, some want it slower.
Elaboration for Joker...
The game is a series of decisions. For some reason, after a wrong decision some players may feel the need to post about a nerf or complain that the game is too fast, hence why we are here. It is downright amusing when the slow of thinking decide the game is too fast because they are unable or unwilling to improve, and usually there is some derision about 'twitch' gaming, the implication that emailing advanced notice of an attack would somehow make the game 'smarter'.
Other people (i.e. people who want to play rather then change the game) say 'shit I died' to themselves, then something like 'hmm, what did I do wrong, how can I prevent that in the future' and continue playing.
It's like saying chess is better then tennis, or football (american not that sissy eu stuff), equating a slowness of action with a greatness of thought.
Thanks for your opinion.
A regular chess game is also turn based, there is no "decide now" involved in a continually changing environment. A faster pace is better suited to a melee combat based game. This continual erosion of the speed of the game - I suppose you would like to watch underwater boxing as well?
It is too slow, agree with me or not.
Defensive play has become more of the norm. Lets see if I can say this right...
Two enemies meet in the field.
One is agressive the other more defensive, a counter puncher, if you will.
Who has the advantage, and is this advantage 'too much' or unrealistic?
It's a game, but the current speed of melee discourages taking chances. Or should I say, unfairly rewards conservative play.
It comes back to justificatioins for certain mechanics...
Crush Through was originally intended to give turtles (usually shielders) something to worry about. Unfortunately, it is a somewhat viable alternative now to uselessly trying to feint or get through the blocks of some non shielding blocker. It was always tricky to get around a good blocker but it can be an exercise of actual minutes now. I get CT'd lately I don't think 'cheap move' I think 'well it was bound to happen because they made swings so slow' and assume the CT-er wanted a change from the turn based paradigm.
I dunno, do any decent blockers feel it is in anyway difficult to turtle with manual blocking?
Perhaps that it is working as intended, forcing better team play as it were by discouraging heroes - screw you players who want to play a heroic melee combat game. It is slow enough now that you have time to regret a poor choice before you die and suffer the inane hell of death chat - I've even seen people having a pointless argument in regular chat while fighting - are they that unchallenged by the game or it's speed? Also, the slower pace magnifies mistakes in a way - opponents have a larger window of opportunity to capitalize on it, without actually 'doing' anything on their part - again, perhaps as intended.
Hmm wonder if weapon stun is still in here, might have to try and find out, I always hated that too. I'll also have to pick up a polearm once in a while and see if 1 wpf is still enough for a melee weapon.
I'll never stop trying to impose my view on this game, one day something good might happen.