cRPG

cRPG => General Discussion => Topic started by: Leshma on January 23, 2013, 09:13:18 pm

Title: Lobbyism
Post by: Leshma on January 23, 2013, 09:13:18 pm
I've noticed that most melee fighters are accused of it, and it seems they open balance threads more often than ranged players. Why is that happening?

Are melee fighters bad people and are those ranged folks nice people?

Somehow I don't believe in that. Especially if we take into account that more people are playing ranged classes or hybrid ranged classes.

I'll give one example, something that happened recently. A player who haven't played cRPG for a long time, Tuatha_BalrogBoru said how he missed the old times when it was fun to play 2H (I'm not sure when was that time because ranged is being a massive threat to shiedless infantry). I asked him why, because I'm satisfied how I perform as 2H. Of course, that depends how many ranged players in the servers but in general is okay. He didn't respond. Tomorrow I saw him playing as mounted xbowmen, he didn't complain anymore.

What you think is the reason why most people accused of lobbyism come from ranks of shieldless infantry?
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Miwiw on January 23, 2013, 09:19:44 pm
You're lobbying too.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tzar on January 23, 2013, 09:20:49 pm
Most of you are yet the devs dont listen thank god for that.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Grumbs on January 23, 2013, 09:22:22 pm
"Cus they don't use tactics and charge up hills towards ranged without a shield"

There is some truth to this, but theres a whole extra layer of depth to the issue. My biggest complaint is that I see ranged as having to put in 1/10th of the effort a manual blocking melee guy has to put in, yet gets these 1 hit kills and if they are put under pressure in a melee fight they still have the same or similar defensive capabilities as the pure melee

Even with a shield you're then an easier target to hit, it can only take limited shots before breaking, and shear volume of ranged can render a shield useless. Plus it impacts your melee vs melee capability

The way you approach the situation is important though, and tactics can have a huge impact on defeating ranged. But I could say the same thing if I removed ranged ability to do anything in melee. I could suggest they need to use better tactics to not get into a melee fight in the first place. Why the **** should ranged get to dictate who need to play with better tactics when they just stand around pewpewing rather than pvping

The risk vs reward is very skewed with ranged.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Leshma on January 23, 2013, 09:27:07 pm
You're lobbying too.

I don't like ranged, won't ever play ranged again, don't want to try to understand them anymore. As for melee goes, I'm covered with main and alt.

This game has by far the most annoying ranged aspect. I've never played a game where ranged players induce so much rage in usually calm people.

I just want to know why are the bad guys always melee players.

Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Panos on January 23, 2013, 09:30:50 pm
The majority of this mod plays with a 2hander sword, the most broken class of this mod in my honest opinion.

- 2handers whine that polearms are OP, lets remove polestun.
- 2handers whine that cavalry is OP, lets nerf lance damage and give couch damage max 20 points
- 2handers whine about throwing how OP it is lets nerf it to the bone

and the list goes on and on and on.

I strongly believe that the devs are actually afraid to touch 2handers because people may actually stop playing the mod..need proof??Ok. :


One hand turn speed buffed,2handers reaction.

so basicly , kicks got nerfed to oblivion, crushthrough got nerfed to oblivion, and 1 handed were made demi gods? lol 1 handed was eazymod already now its just gonna be fully op. kinngrimm been bribing the dev team???  and **** your downvotes nabs. i play 1handed most of time and this is just rediculous unballanced haha

quoted for truth, im rerolling shield. forums full of downvoting shield noobs also.


Leshma`s reaction to decreased damage if you hold attacks addon.

Yes, that was before this change. From what I heard, what this change does is to lower damage bellow normal levels if you hold your attack "too long". Eventually your chambered attack will glance.

Chambered attacks were one play style, spam was the other. Now there is just one viable melee play style and that is spam. Thanks to jitter and unstable connection I can't spam so now I'm royally fucked.

These recent changes did buff one "class" and that's agi shielder. We will certainly see more of those in upcoming months if things stay this way.

Only way I'll support held attack nerf is to make same changes to shields, aka the longer you hold shield up the more damage shield takes or something like that.

Also, what happened with removal of forceshield from horseback, you said you're going to do it?

Banok`s reaction to the same matter..

shield was already most op weapon in the game. i would definitely reroll shielder now if it wasnt so mind numbly boring to play. guess I could go archer or just quit playing all together.

Lance couch is back to one hit.

Banok`s reaction when he found out that you cant block while kicking

and how are you supposed to fight face hugging shielders now? kicks? nope. greatmauls? nope.

They should have at least made kicks easier to land.


GTX after a small nerf in the stats of all GS

Time to go polearm, since danish/german is useless.


Just imagine a patch that balances 2h class with the other classes..

Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tibe on January 23, 2013, 09:31:06 pm
Easy really. Cause getting stabbed in the face by a 2hhero isnt half as maddening as getting shot by some dude 500 times, who you know you can rip to shreads in less than 1second if you could catch him, but you cant.

I belive 2hs and such are more in the game than other class players. Cause as ranger you just pick some high spot and start landing shots and looking out for enemy rangers and backstabbers from time to time. Or if you shielder you just keep turteling more if you get too scared. Shieldless infantry have to be slightly more aware than others. But somehow 2h is still OP as hell.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: The_Bloody_Nine on January 23, 2013, 09:32:34 pm
Most ranged don't dare to lobby because they know it is a more shitty experience to helplessly die from projectiles than in a way where you can get the satisfactory feeling of fighting back.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Apsod on January 23, 2013, 09:34:39 pm
(click to show/hide)
Detective Panos is on the case!
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Leshma on January 23, 2013, 09:39:36 pm
Panos, you have some serious issues. I thought you were cool, but something is terribly wrong with you man.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Panos on January 23, 2013, 09:43:27 pm
I have a serious issue against 2handers.

They get on my nerves.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Joker86 on January 23, 2013, 10:01:52 pm
I just want to know why are the bad guys always melee players.

I can tell you. But it is a difficult matter, which will lead to a wall of text, but you asked for it, so don't complain.


In cRPG we have three basic classes (="metaclasses"): Infantry, Ranged and Cavalry.

On battle mode, we are fighting as teams, which means there are other players fighting with us against a similar number of enemies. This already changes quite a lot, compared to a pure 1vs.1 situation. Your teammates have an impact on your gameplay.

For example, cavalry helps each other out by distracting the enemy. Sometimes, when I spawned late with my pikeman, I got killed by cavalry. Usually a pike makes you invulnerable towards melee cavalry, but when there are three or more of them, you can't keep track of all of them, and sooner or later one of them will see and use the chance to backstab you. This happens quite automatically, because as cavalry you are pressing W constantly and are riding around, clicking whenever there is an opportunity to attack.

Archers, on the other hand, usually tend to choose good shooting positions, and somehow instinctively stick together. As a map usually has only few good shooting positions, you find a lot of archers there. The thing with archers is, that they support each other exponentially. Which means that every archer more supports all the other archers equally. The more archers there are already, the more archers the additional archer will support, which means the overall support delivered by every additional archer becomes bigger and bigger = exponential. You can see it very well in strategy games. If you reach a certain amount of Space Marines, they can kill an endless amount of charging Zerg.

Now let's see infantry. Infantry can support each other only to a very limited extend. You can be supported in melee only by three or four teammates at the most, given that two of them are pikemen, for example. Additional infantrymen won't help you, as they don't have that radius of action to support you. And in difference to ranged and cavalry, the differences within the infantry meta-class are quite drastic! There are shieldmen, hoplites, pikemen, twohanders and crushthrough infantry, to name only the most important classes. compared to the cavalry and ranged metaclasses their gameplay differs quite radically. While all cavalry and all ranged share the same strengthes and weaknesses, infantry depends much more on teamplay than other classes. You need a shieldman to be protected from ranged, and you need a pikeman to be protected from cavalry. And then you need a two hander or something like that to dish out some damage.

So basically we can say, that infantry has the POTENTIAL to not be countered by anything, but counter everything themselves, but on the other hand it has the REQUIREMENT of tactics and teamplay to do so, which the other metaclasses do not have, at least not to that extend. Which means, that playing infantry always requires more brain (overview, planning, tactics, discipline, etc.) than playing the other classes.

Next to that basic difference of infantry compared to cav and ranged, there is another aspect, which is linked somehow: infantry is the "reacting" class, while cavalry and archers are rather "acting" classes. This has to do with the rather barely measurable aspect of "flexibility" of the different classes. I would say the main element of that flexibility is the choice of your target. Due to the high speed of their horses and the long range of their bows/crossbows, cavalry and archers are able to pick their targets, and usually you pick those which are easy ones. Infantry doesn't have the chance to pick easy cavalry or archer targets very often. It happens only when the cavalry or archers are very unaware, which is definitely less likely than being surprised by a rider or hit by an arrow in the middle of the battlefield. Another aspect is being able to evade enemy attacks, which infantry can't do much about, except of always facing attacking cavalry or dodging/blocking incoming projectiles (with a shield). Or hiding at a safe spot and being basically useless and experiencing a rather boring game, limited to watching the (usually ugly) textures of some rock, tree or ruins.

Edit: also the time you actually fight matters. When the round starts, cavalry spurs their horses and shortly after is already stabbing at targets, until they get downed, if at all. Archers start, run a rather short distance until they find a good position and start shooting. They shoot until they need to displace, and even while displacing they can shoot and keep on fighting, at least if they have a little bit foresight and move in time (so they don't need to actually run away). Infantry gameplay consists mainly of running after targets and checking the surroundings, while the actual melee fights don't occupy that much of their playtime. At least less compared to cavalry and archers.

This leads to the situation where infantry is actually all the time in danger and needs awareness all the time, whereas cavalry and archers can very well estimate when they are rather safe and when not. This leads to the impression of infantry, being somehow the "cannonfodder" or the "fool" on the battlefield. They are limited to the choice of targets which AGREE to be attacked by infantry, which was especially obvious before the kiting nerf. Together with the inability of infantry, to attack and kill certain classes (especially ranged cavalry), which unfortnately is the goal of the game, this leads to regular frustration for infantry players.

All those problems which I mentioned were more or less only adressed by balance tweaks, usually in form of stat nerfs for ranged and cavalry classes. But stats don't change anything on the problems I mentioned above, cavalry can still pick their targets, archers are still able to shoot over distance, and infantry is still limited to reacting instead of acting.

If you ask me for a solution, I can only repeat the solution I came up with long time ago: change battle more to conquest mode! Infantry would have a new task which would be much better accomplishable, because it is easier for infantry to conquer and hold terrain instead of catching and killing a horse archer. Next to this it would give infantry some kind of common focus, instead of that blurry goal of killing all enemies, leading to infantry scattering all over the place in the desperate attempt to turn their reacting into acting.

If something is unclear, please ask by rephrasing what you understood, instead of flaming me instantly and wasting a lot of time to write something I probably agree with. In any case I can say that I did not want to give any evaluation about any class, the skill needed to play it or their justification in the game. I just wanted to point out the differences in gameplay for those classes.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Elindor on January 23, 2013, 10:05:46 pm
(click to show/hide)

:shock: tldr

....someone had to say it  :wink:

---

EDIT :  OK I DID READ IT. 

What Joker says on this is all 100% true imho.  Very well thought out and presented my good sir.

Fact of the matter is that infantry is forced to be MORE ORGANIZED relative to archers or cav to perform.  Archers cluster on a hill together to force multiply and cavalry streak across the maps...neither requiring a huge amount of organization.  In Strat battles, infantry form shieldwalls, etc...and sometimes this happens in battle, but not often since its often largely pubs and no common TS is being used. 

I agree for this reason that a conquest mode would UNIFY THE EFFORTS of the infantry (which are meant to take and hold ground) and "help" them use more teamwork naturally.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Dezilagel on January 23, 2013, 10:14:03 pm
which will lead to a wall of text...

What a surprise.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: XyNox on January 23, 2013, 10:14:21 pm
I dont really know how to approach this topic without making people butthurt but lets take the famous archery disputes as an example here:

Every archer is a melee by default. Instead of having the luxury of armor and bigass lightsabers and 10 PS oneshot builds, archers need to learn to fight with peasant equipment to be of any good as shooting alone will get you killed almost every round. Melees however, whenever there is a balancing discussion about ranged, dont even seem to know the basics of archery. I cant imagine a single person ( honestly ) saying that archery is easier than a melee class and still everyone is calling for nerfs. How can this behavior be anything else then lobbying ?

When I play with my lvl29, nonloomed 2h alt the game is fun. It is fun because I dont have to fight as if my life depends on it. With my 2h alt, I am a hunter. I dodge horses with ease, dodge projectiles with ease, catch up to archers with ease and simply outfeint, outspam, outfootwork my oppenents. I have full control over what is happening and taking advantage of my capabilities. If I do a mistake ? Not a problem, probably just lost like 30% HP. The whole gameplay feels totally arcade-game like with my 2h, letting me win the fights I do not deserve to win.

When I switch to my lvl 34, +3 bow +3 arrows archer however the game is not nearly as fun because I am restricted as shit. One error and I am dead. 5 seconds of unawareness and I am dead. Agi shielder looks at me and melee teammates are busy chasing enemy horsearchers ? Dead ! Round started, trying to stay with my teammates but they outrun me in heavy armor. Contrary to my 2h alt where I am the hunter, playing my archer I always feel like the prey. I cant dream about engaging something since I am to busy to simply survive all the autokill counters in the game. If a medium 2h inf runs at me and I shoot my slow-motion arrows at him, which then inflict 30 % dmg each, it is my responsability to make every of those arrows connect. However no melee with an average reaction time of less than 0.5 seconds will manage to run into arrows that often.

It doesnt stop there:

Stationary target 20m away. I aim carefully and I miss with 174 wpf. Why ? Because some people cryed too much about accuracy.

I shoot some guy 4 times in the body with fully loomed bodkins and longbow while he wears a kuyak just to get oneshotted by his greatsword right after. Why ? Because some people cryed too much about damage.

I try to hit some guy having an epileptic seizre 5 meters away from me, sadly his spazzing limbs move faster than my slow-motion arrows. Why ? Because some people cryed too much about missile speed.

I am chased by some plated flamberge spammer, who can spam his flamberge faster than I can swing my handaxe, which also would glance 95%. I realize that the game simply does not let me win in that situation and I decide to flee. Cant, plated guy outruns me and oneshots me. Why ? Because some people cryed too much about running archers.


Still, instead of doing anything usefull like trying archery yourself, all you see is nerfthreads. They dont even have anything to complain about and still are to unchallenged masters of whine. Its simply getting more and more of a routine. Melee wants something -> instead of using his brain to analyse his errors he goes to the forum and lobbies about it. And now tell me how you could even wonder why meleeplayers are being accused of being lobbyists so much.

Let the butthurt begin.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Joseph Porta on January 23, 2013, 10:15:57 pm
The funny thing is i play all classes, except pure archer/thrower cause its  boring & gay, and i must say that i hate all classes. By far the gayest class is left swing spam shielders, you have to left block their bloody left swing for god sakes.
Anyhow, polearm is the biggest easymode there is, even compared to 2hers.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Joker86 on January 23, 2013, 10:16:05 pm
:shock: tldr

(click to show/hide)

The question was a one liner, yet everything else but simple. I hope you agree that you can't discuss it within a few sentences. And if you try, a lot of people will jump up and accuse you of lobyying against their class, implying that it needs less skills. I guess even now some archers will jump up and ask me how I can say that they don't need to be aware of the battlefield and whatnot. (Btw the answer is: you do, but not as much as infnatry has to. This does NOT mean your class is easier to play overall.).

What a surprise.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Elindor on January 23, 2013, 10:20:43 pm
The question was a one liner, yet everything else but simple. I hope you agree that you can't discuss it within a few sentences.

Look at my post again :)

----

To XyNox....not butthurt because I know archery is hard as shit 1v1.

Joker's point is that a hill of archers is force multiplicative....its not 1 archer that causes issues and makes people call for nerfs.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: IG_Saint on January 23, 2013, 10:26:47 pm
I have a serious issue against 2handers.

They get on my nerves.

You mean you have a serious issue with a handful of 2 handed players who bitch on the forum a lot. Most two handers just play the damn game, rather than whine about every supposed issue. Hate the players not the class. Except horse archers, they deserve all the hate they get :wink:.

In response to Joker's too long post: Give people a small extra reward (gold or xp, maybe score though I think that'll be less effective) for killing their own class. I'd base the classes on wpf and riding skill. Cav will go after cav instead of spawnraping or backstabbing, ranged will concentrate on taking out the enemies ranged resulting in less fire against melee or cav and lastly melee might finally stop pointlessly chasing after ranged and cav. The result will be a more fun metagame for everyone.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tears of Destiny on January 23, 2013, 10:29:35 pm
Cav will still go after spawn/occupied infantry because I imagine that the reward for 3 cav 2 infantry would be substantially less then 8 or so infantry (which is an easier number and helps secure a multi), but sure I imagine it would help a bit.


Things get a bit confusing for me though considering battle must be balanced differently then siege and yet be of comparable rewards to each other.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tibe on January 23, 2013, 10:33:04 pm
The funny thing is i play all classes, except pure archer/thrower cause its  boring & gay, and i must say that i hate all classes. By far the gayest class is left swing spam shielders, you have to left block their bloody left swing for god sakes.
Anyhow, polearm is the biggest easymode there is, even compared to 2hers.

Amazing how I feel exactly the same. Pure classes are rubbish and gay. I think the reason why polearms are somewhat easy to some cause they can really stun alot of blocks made by 2hs.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: LordBerenger on January 23, 2013, 10:33:43 pm
You mean you have a serious issue with a handful of 2 handed players who bitch on the forum a lot. Most two handers just play the damn game, rather than whine about every supposed issue. Hate the players not the class. Except horse archers, they deserve all the hate they get :wink:.

In response to Joker's too long post: Give people a small extra reward (gold or xp, maybe score though I think that'll be less effective) for killing their own class. I'd base the classes on wpf and riding skill. Cav will go after cav instead of spawnraping or backstabbing, ranged will concentrate on taking out the enemies ranged resulting in less fire against melee or cav and lastly melee might finally stop pointlessly chasing after ranged and cav. The result will be a more fun metagame for everyone.

I hate 2handers. Because most ones who go 2handers can block. And since it's easy to block since combat speed is so slow = Their chances of killing me is 20% higher. I'd rather face a polearmer.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Hunter_the_Honourable on January 23, 2013, 10:35:29 pm
I hate 2handers. Because most ones who go 2handers can block. And since it's easy to block since combat speed is so slow = Their chances of killing me is 20% higher. I'd rather face a polearmer.

only because a majority of players and classes are better then polearmer's :P
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: BlueKnight on January 23, 2013, 10:37:50 pm
- 2handers whine that cavalry is OP, lets nerf lance damage and give couch damage max 20 points
- 2handers whine about throwing how OP it is lets nerf it to the bone
Whoa! Stop it. Who is that 2h whining at cav lol. 2h is the easiest vs cav

Also where is that 2h whining at throwing? If you are just talking about that over 1 year ago madness with throwing flying everywhere when everybody was a hybrid with throwing it's a bit outdated.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Falka on January 23, 2013, 10:37:54 pm
(click to show/hide)
. Melees however, whenever there is a balancing discussion about ranged, dont even seem to know the basics of archery. I cant imagine a single person ( honestly ) saying that archery is easier than a melee class and still everyone is calling for nerfs.
(click to show/hide)

Xynox, you don't get the point. Melee players, including me, don't care if being an archer is easier or harder than being 2h, polearmer or shielder. They just hate range spam. 1 archer is hardly OP, can not deny, but when server is full of range no one cares how hard it is to get decent KDR as an archer. The only soultion to this problem I can imagine is limit of range players on the server (it will never happen ofc).   
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Artyem on January 23, 2013, 10:44:08 pm
nerf 2h
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Polobow on January 23, 2013, 10:44:22 pm
They get on my nerves.

Especially with the weapons they use.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Joseph Porta on January 23, 2013, 10:46:22 pm
Amazing how I feel exactly the same. Pure classes are rubbish and gay. I think the reason why polearms are somewhat easy to some cause they can really stun alot of blocks made by 2hs.
i cant put my hand onit either but there is something about polearms that really makes it easy, i think its greatly due to the animation being very spam viable.. And i do play pure classes, just not for more then an hour a day, then it gets boring I always laugh when i see people who, wheni started playing 8 months ago, still use the same class to this date, and still fail at it. ^^

I have.. 14 alts that are 21+ differing from 12/21 16/18 tribrids to 27/9 swashbucklers.
Honestly i probably woldnt even made a generation if there werent alts to play on, or id go Wiltzu on the respec button..
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: IG_Saint on January 23, 2013, 10:47:06 pm
Cav will still go after spawn/occupied infantry because I imagine that the reward for 3 cav 2 infantry would be substantially less then 8 or so infantry (which is an easier number and helps secure a multi), but sure I imagine it would help a bit.


Things get a bit confusing for me though considering battle must be balanced differently then siege and yet be of comparable rewards to each other.

Hopefully if something like what I suggested ever gets implemented it would be a part of the long awaited multi removal and xp/gold overhaul.

I hadn't actually thought of siege, just battle, but instead of the above suggestion I would give extra rewards for completing objectives in siege. Opening gates, destroying doors, capturing the flag etc. Especially with the (again) long awaited siege 2.0, I think that would work fine.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Grumbs on January 23, 2013, 10:53:12 pm
Sensible games have class limits otherwise you get tons of snipers. The only way I could see it working here is with bow/xbow limits based on how many slots are being used on the server. So 60 slots used = 5 bows/xbows per team or something. Like in Strat where you select pre-defined gear, there would be like 5 per round

It wouldn't be fair on people who's class is made for ranged play though, but maybe people would be encouraged to account for that and go with more hybrid style builds. I'd support buffs to hybrids if there was some equipment limits

I know it won't happen, just an idea :D
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: XyNox on January 23, 2013, 11:35:03 pm
Melee players [...] don't care if being an archer is easier or harder than being 2h, polearmer or shielder. They just hate range spam. [...] no one cares how hard it is to get decent KDR as an archer. The only soultion to this problem I can imagine is limit of range players [...]   

Oh my dear Ciri I indeed got the point. My little post described how archery becomes more and more unfun because melees complain about their fun being treatened by ranged and are therefore suggesting nerfs, nerfs at the expence of ranged players that is. And now you gave a live demonstration of that by basicly telling us that you dont care how bad the game gets for ranged players as long as the melee players have fun. Dont you think this fits the title of the threat pretty well ?
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Falka on January 23, 2013, 11:50:13 pm
Meh, archery can be nerfed to the ground and it doesn't help if half of the server will bring bow or xbow. Also, I rarely play on battle servers (and currently don't play at all) so personally don't really care about range spam, it's not that bad on siege. And this sentence: "you dont care how bad the game gets for ranged players as long as the melee players have fun" can be related to archers as well, don't you think? you dont care how bad the game gets for melee players as long as the ranged players have fun - I'd say it's equally true as your sentence  :wink:
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tydeus on January 24, 2013, 12:47:49 am
I've played every class in crpg and with multiple builds and varying heirlooms. I have several alts and several looms. Recently I've been playing my 1h, no-shield, thrower alt and without a doubt, the class that fucks me up the most, would be archers. I had a round earlier today where I got 3~ kills with my throwing weapons then proceeded to 1v5 the last guys on the opposite team (all melee) with a MW Italian Falchion and ended the round with full hp.

This is why I do not like ranged, because ranged weapons are the counter to player skill in melee. Had there been a single ranged player among those last 5 guys, I surely would have lost. Any footwork I utilized for positioning on the melee enemies would have been completely nullified had I taken even a single hit and would have led to my death (41 body armor, 48 hp character). It's often nearly impossible to fight even one person when under fire from ranged, while you can utilize footwork easily enough in a 1v2 (if you have the right amount of athletics) to avoid allowing both enemies to simultaneously get the position for a solid attack.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: XyNox on January 24, 2013, 12:49:08 am
Meh, archery can be nerfed to the ground and it doesn't help if half of the server will bring bow or xbow. Also, I rarely play on battle servers (and currently don't play at all) so personally don't really care about range spam, it's not that bad on siege. And this sentence: "you dont care how bad the game gets for ranged players as long as the melee players have fun" can be related to archers as well, don't you think? you dont care how bad the game gets for melee players as long as the ranged players have fun - I'd say it's equally true as your sentence  :wink:

Ideally both have fun. Still, devs only decided in favour of melees so far. And still you almost never see nerf threads opened by ranged players but instead you see them spammed by melee players on a daily basis. And this is the whole lobbying issue we are discussing here I assume.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tydeus on January 24, 2013, 12:51:01 am
Ideally both have fun. Still, devs only decided in favour of melees so far. And still you almost never see nerf threads opened by ranged players but instead you see them spammed by melee players on a daily basis. And this is the whole lobbying issue we are discussing here I assume.
Remove that sentence and I will think about removing my -1 from your post.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: XyNox on January 24, 2013, 12:56:52 am
Remove that sentence and I will think about removing my -1 from your post.

I would have guessed the minus was for the first sentence of my Post

(click to show/hide)

No, seriously  :lol:

Tell me one thing concerning archery that did NOT get nerfed.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tears of Destiny on January 24, 2013, 12:58:45 am
Tell me one thing concerning archery that did NOT get nerfed.


The idiotic decision to raise HS damage from 170% or so to a 210%, other then that though you kinda have a point, but I think c-RPG has long since hit exhaustion for any new opinions about why range/whatever suckzorz
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: XyNox on January 24, 2013, 01:03:34 am

The idiotic decision to raise HS damage from 170% or so to a 210%, other then that though you kinda have a point, but I think c-RPG has long since hit exhaustion for any new opinions about why range/whatever suckzorz

Its one of those nerf 100% then buff 50% as compensation "ninjanerfs" I guess. I do a lot less 1hitheadshots then i used to with my longbow.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tydeus on January 24, 2013, 01:13:05 am
There have been several nerfs, but also multiple buffs in varying ways. Two years ago, archers weren't able to do pierce damage for example. A few months ago, 6PD builds were capable of the same damage as a 10PD build, thus pigeonholing archers into only a couple of different builds without taking a gigantic hit to effectiveness. Instead of simply lowering the damage that 6PD archers do, they gave all archers more wpf. They changed around light armor weight amounts so that you weren't stuck with either a 4 weight chest or a 10, with nothing in between. They lowered the maximum amount of armor that melee can obtain, particularly by nerfing armors that only melee characters use. All throwing weapons obtained the itp_extra_penetration property, including cut damage throwing weapons.

That's off the top of my head, without asking anyone else or without looking up past threads.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Leshma on January 24, 2013, 01:13:44 am
Thank you XyNox for derailing my thread and turning it into archery buff propaganda.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tydeus on January 24, 2013, 01:19:48 am
Thank you XyNox for derailing my thread and turning it into archery buff propaganda.
Oh, you had 999 Renown, congrats on becoming a "king".

Edit:
(click to show/hide)

Edit2:
(click to show/hide)

Edit3: Archers now have itp_extra_penetration as well.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: rustyspoon on January 24, 2013, 02:57:38 am
Currently I think the infantry "classes" are pretty well balanced.

They all have their pros and cons.

Archery is funny. Unloomed you do pathetic damage, fully loomed you can do ridiculous damage. Still, a single archer isn't that dangerous.  But as many people above have mentioned, the threat scales dramatically as the numbers of archers increase. The big problem with ranged is the only real counter to ranged is more ranged. Don't know the solution to that problem and don't care too much. I find ranged hellaciously boring to play.

I think the mod needs more tweaks than big fixes.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Panos on January 24, 2013, 03:31:34 am
Currently I think the infantry "classes" are pretty well balanced.
They all have their pros and cons.

Please can you name me some pros that  polearm class has over 2h class??
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Joker86 on January 24, 2013, 03:41:14 am
Remember that this discussion is not about which classes are OP/UP, more/less skill based, more/less important and so on. It is about how come that it's always certain classes which make the players experience the game a certain way, and what those factors are. And then it would be much more interesting to find out how those factors influence your perception precisely, and THEN we will perhaps be capable to decide if everything's okay with the classes. But most likely even then we won't have the one truth, if it exists at all. So stop lobyying for/against a certain class. Rather think about what the gameplay differences are for certain classes, and where problems could be hidden. This would actually contribute something constructive and would help everybody, instead of yet another tiresome discussion we already had countless times before.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: rustyspoon on January 24, 2013, 03:52:31 am
Please can you name me some pros that  polearm class has over 2h class??

To keep it short, I'll only name a few:

Glaive, Poleaxe, Great Long Axe/Long War Axe, Long Bardiche, Long Spear, Long Hafted Spiked Mace...oh, and right swing.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Gurnisson on January 24, 2013, 06:13:54 am
Please can you name me some pros that  polearm class has over 2h class??

Versatility (pikes, hoplite, lance etc.)

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Falka on January 24, 2013, 08:33:49 am
Oh, you had 999 Renown, congrats on becoming a "king".

He should be "Queen"  :?
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Grumpy_Nic on January 24, 2013, 08:48:33 am

What you think is the reason why most people accused of lobbyism come from ranks of shieldless infantry?

The way I see it there are many rageposts from shieldless infantry. I kind of understand that they are frustrated sometimes when a large number of ranged is on the servers.
But I am pretty sure that shieldless infantry does not see its own weakness, or does not want to accept it which leads to a lot of QQ, or lobbyism. I hate all these shitthreads, whoever might create them. If you choose your class you need to know where its limits are, sometimes you can break them and at the end of the round you'll be awarded with a multi, maybe valour and several "GJ" from your teammates. But most of the times you will not and you will not make the game better if you go to the forum and post QQ threads where you point out how OP other classes are that you have no idea of.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Haboe on January 24, 2013, 08:52:52 am
2 Handers and polearms fight face to face. They define their own skill by surviving a fight with an other player. If they get shot before they actually fight that player they see it as an unfair loss.

Those players define skill the wrong way, cause the skill of being pro in battle or siege is survival, not only vs melee, but also vs ranged.
If you get shot that means you are at the wrong location, and your battle awareness isn't perfect.

Therefore they often get pissed and blaim OP ranged for it.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: GuiKa on January 24, 2013, 10:41:56 am
(click to show/hide)

/Thread
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Macropus on January 24, 2013, 12:03:54 pm
The problem with lobbysm is people being arrogant and ignorant. And [insert +100 bad words here cuz my english is bad and whatever]. They only recognize the kind of skill that is nessessary for playing their class.
For example, twohanders' definition of skill is manual blocking, shielders' - being able to fight in clusterfuck, archers' - shooting & positioning and so on. They just don't want to understand another classes and to realize that the game is not only about their class.
That's silly.
Every balance discussions converts into senseless posts like "I was killed today by a spearman with 2 hits, and therefore they're OP" without logic and without stating huge speedbonus or others 9000+ factors that affect damage.

PS: I never rage about game, instead I rage about dumb people  :twisted:, sorry for that.
And yet most of you guys are cool.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Templar_Ratigan on January 24, 2013, 12:24:23 pm
Easy really. Cause getting stabbed in the face by a 2hhero isnt half as maddening as getting shot by some dude 500 times, who you know you can rip to shreads in less than 1second if you could catch him, but you cant.

Here lies the problem. What frustrates people is completely individual to them, true people may experience frustration over the same elements and come together to agree on the same issues in game, but that's just a series of subjective experiences masquerading as an objective fact.

From what ive observed the main problem is with peoples expectations. Too many times have I heard lines such as the one above 'Oh if I could catch him I could kill him' or 'Well if hadn't used X weapon I would not have died'.

The truth is that no one 'deserves' a kill, (unless perhaps they were in a melee/ranged fight with someone and they landed many more hits than the other but still died and even then that's just me being facetious), you earn your kills.

If someone is faster than you and is abusing this to run away and shoot you, tough monkey balls, his build counters yours in that context, but this would have to be the context of open ground. Otherwise there are other factors, such as the ground's height level, your armour and his damage, your ability to dodge with efficiency, is there any cover to hide behind or ignore him for a bit or bait such an individual with?

But should the person playing the archer HAVE to take the same risks as a melee player in that context? He's building a ranged character, isn't shooting you what he has set out to do? If a melee character is close to an archer that archer is usually dead and if said archer is skilled enough to block, attack and maybe even kill in melee with the little toothpick of a weapon that most of them have to use, surely that is a factor in favour of the archer's melee abilities too?

But then people claim that ranged characters don't have to possess the same level of skill as melee players, I see a contradiction there. After all melee isn't only skilled when melee-only characters do it, is it?

By the way i'm not saying this is your argument or mentality, but I thought they were points worth raising in general using your quote as a kick-starter.

Most of this can be alleviated by changing the expectation. In other words, don't 'expect to win' or 'expect to get a kill', instead expect that anything positive or bad can potentially happen and then gauge your position within that instant as best you can, but do not feel frustrated if said action did not produce the result you expected.

Although we are all guilty of this, myself included, it doesn't mean that it shouldn't be tried.  It's much easier to blame others than blame yourself.

Bearing in mind I play a really really fucking slow and awkward build and I spend most of my time being shot, especially on Eu 1. So I understand the frustration and ive certainly been known to go 'fucking archers' when being shot to pieces, but this is not something I carry with me in my mentality. So it does not poison the perspective I have of being considerate to another's position.

There is an issue of team balance however but this is a more difficult issue since it would be imposing restrictions on people merely for the choices they make in a game about choices. Until such a time as I log in and see the words 'Class - Archer' or 'Class - Two-hander' I do not see the relevancy of implying groupings where there are none.

True it is easier for the human brain to create groups out of random information and for the most part I don't see anything wrong with calling most bow users archers or most two handed weapon users Two-handers. But These are just simplifying terms.

It's important to remember that we don't actually have classes yet and i'm not arguing semantics here i'm actually arguing against the restrictive nature and mindset of those terms, which seem to imply an inherency in their existence that does not in fact...exist.

I'm just wary of where this module is heading in regards to such prolific opinions, not that they are wrong, only that there is always another angle to consider and I would never wish to see this game chopped up into a series of set rules and angles which would only serve to go full circle and make this mod into a poor parody of native.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Prpavi on January 24, 2013, 12:27:11 pm
I actually think we need more ranged, you can still partially see the sun through the arrows, the sky need to be completley covered for me to be satisfied.

Also killstreak Arrowrain!
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: highglandeur on January 24, 2013, 12:45:39 pm
Fucking 2handers always crying, it's all over the forum.
Never seen poleplayers crying about polenerf, never seen an archer crying bout nerf or ghost arrow or whatever, never seen anyone crying that 2h is OP and lolstab should be removed.
Why is it that only those fucking 2 handers are spamming the forum with their QQ, fucking nubs!

Pavi is right, in medieval time arrows would pour from the sky dealing massive death like a radioactive acid rain.
Buff archery and force respec all those 2h nubs to archer!!!!
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: MlotekPL on January 24, 2013, 12:54:35 pm
Viva Che Panosa! Save us from theses ******* 2h capitalists !
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: rufio on January 24, 2013, 01:11:03 pm
Please can you name me some pros that  polearm class has over 2h class??

ballanced shieldbreaking, rightwing of doom, higher weaponstun chances overall, more versatile. glaive.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on January 24, 2013, 02:07:39 pm
ballanced shieldbreaking *Stop being stupid, 2h got that*, rightwing of doom *Yeah, poor 2h, only got every animation of doom (-the overhead), and if you use the flameberge you get the polearm rightswing*, higher weaponstun chances overall *Unless there is some formula that gives poles a higher chance (which there very well might be) then they don't beat 2hs by a real amount anyways*, more versatile *bullshit, 2h got just as much versatility as poles got if not more*. glaive *yeah, poor 2h, they only got every amazingly broken 2h sword out there, what shall they do against a glaive? Certainly not outreach it with a stab or just fight them normally, no, it is impossible to fight a glaive without getting kicked and it is such a great weapon!*.

Also, Leshma, if people are really lobbying for unfair advantages and knowing it is unfair then they're really shit at lobbying, most people actually believe the thing they're using is extremely underpowered, and find it uncomprehendable that anyone disagrees.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tyr_ on January 24, 2013, 02:21:55 pm

Archers, on the other hand, usually tend to choose good shooting positions, and somehow instinctively stick together. As a map usually has only few good shooting positions, you find a lot of archers there. The thing with archers is, that they support each other exponentially. Which means that every archer more supports all the other archers equally. The more archers there are already, the more archers the additional archer will support, which means the overall support delivered by every additional archer becomes bigger and bigger = exponential. You can see it very well in strategy games. If you reach a certain amount of Space Marines, they can kill an endless amount of charging Zerg.


Easy Solution, Add Colossi and Infestors.

(click to show/hide)

Ps: German Greatsword is still the King of all two handers, no matter what this rage-respeccers say!
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tydeus on January 24, 2013, 04:23:08 pm
If you get shot that means you are at the wrong location, and your battle awareness isn't perfect.
I like how you casually state that if someone gets shot, it was only because they screwed up. As if that were anywhere remotely close to the truth. As if a dedicated two-hander or polearm player can somehow be expected to find cover with our map rotation, every round, from beginning to end all while actively participating in the round. Explain to me how you're supposed to do this on Random Plains maps. :?
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: rufio on January 24, 2013, 06:31:06 pm
zlisch witch 2hander is ballanced and has shieldbreak ?? u mean the 1hander that can convert to 2 hander? im perplexed
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Joseph Porta on January 24, 2013, 06:34:57 pm
zlisch witch 2hander is ballanced and has shieldbreak ?? u mean the 1hander that can convert to 2 hander? im perplexed

I was wondering aswell, fighting axe doest count as a 2her imo.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on January 24, 2013, 06:57:38 pm
zlisch witch 2hander is ballanced and has shieldbreak ?? u mean the 1hander that can convert to 2 hander? im perplexed
Yes I mean the 1h that can convert to 2h, ad Joseph you've got 0 reason not to consider it a 2h when it only gets stronger in the secondary mode anyway.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: rufio on January 24, 2013, 07:11:46 pm
solid argument you get there  :|
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: FrugFrug on January 24, 2013, 07:41:50 pm
If you reach a certain amount of Space Marines, they can kill an endless amount of charging Zerg.

Space Marines and Zerg?

Those be two different games bro.  :lol:
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: TurmoilTom on January 24, 2013, 07:42:55 pm
The only reason I don't like ranged is because even when I go shielder they always kill me.

Then when I switch to ranged I can't shoot for shit.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on January 24, 2013, 07:47:37 pm
solid argument you get there  :|
Still waiting for you to explain why it isn't just like any other 2h except it can be used onehanded...
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Joseph Porta on January 24, 2013, 07:56:04 pm
there really isn't a reason, someone could easily take it as a sidearm for shield breaking.

how much c does it do in secondary anyways?
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on January 24, 2013, 07:58:34 pm
there really isn't a reason, someone could easily take it as a sidearm for shield breaking.

how much c does it do in secondary anyways?
These are the stats:
weapon length: 84
weight: 2
difficulty: 12
speed rating: 95
weapon length: 84
thrust damage: 0 pierce
swing damage: 32 cut
slots: 1
Bonus against Shield
Secondary Mode

Pretty sure speed and dmg is 2+ in 2h mode though.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on January 24, 2013, 08:07:16 pm
not reading the thread, seen enough of these to know what's going on.

here's how a typical lobbyist finds themselves whining on the forums:

Lobbyist encounters a wall on the battle server, Lobbyist tries his best to walk right through it, but every time he hits the wall his character stops moving.  Lobbyist continues to run into the wall and is surprised at first, and then starts to get pissed off every time he gets stopped when he runs into the wall.  Lobbyist comes to forums and pitches a bitch asking for the wall to be nerfed.  People reply back saying that the wall has, and will always, be an obstacle that you cannot go through.  You have to go around or over it.   Lobbyist says that he will not change his play style because who's to tell him how to have fun.  Lobbyist continues to post nerf threads and get his buddies to post nerf threads until the devs' finally cave in and let people walk through walls.

Wait, I just described cRPG!
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Osiris on January 24, 2013, 08:10:23 pm
Panos/zlisch I have a question :P What classes do you respect?
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Artyem on January 24, 2013, 08:15:02 pm
nerf 2h

Notice that the only people who have -'d that so far were Kaoklai and GTX, two widely known 2h crutchers who commonly complain about how OP ranged is because it's the only thing that prevents them from just being able to kill everyone on the server without any issue.  There has to be a balance and a counter to ever class, like a big game of rock paper scissors almost.

Shield infantry can defend better against range, but in turn are slower and do less damage than most other people.  Non-shield infantry (2h, polearm, 1h no shield too I guess) are fast, do a lot of damage, but in turn are vulnerable to ranged attacks, and if they want to not get raped horribly by arrows they have to take cover or stick with their teamOR HOLD A LEFT-RIGHT SWING AND LOOK DOWN WHILE DOING THE CHICKEN DANCE, IT BASICALLY MAKES YOU INVINCIBLE ANYWAY.  And then there's ranged, their advantage is quite obvious, however their detriment is that they don't have the ability to really wear heavy armor and can't stack too much PS or IF.  Cavalry is fast, can inflict tons of damage and escape the scene of the crime before anyone can do anything about it, however, they have to deal with a clumsy ass horse that walks up a hill backwards better than it does forwards.  Also, if they don't use a shield their horse is a large target for throwers and archers.

Of course, each class has their flaws as well.  1h has a super fast left to right swing, and if their build is done properly their shield can be made from gods foreskin itself.  But, that's not to forget that 2h has the highest cut weapon (which is an axe), lolstab, hilt slash, and ridiculous animations in general.  Polearm has lolpikes and polestun (and you can say it was removed, but you know it's still there, deep down in the bottom of your heart), and of course, the major advantage of being able to rear cavalry.  Ranged players have numbers, if anything.  Cavalry has bumpslash, bumpstab, bumpcouch, and the ability to do 1/2 of my health with a bump at normal speed.

Like any other game, cRPG tries to have balance, and the way it's been done is through counters.  Every class has an advantage on another, that's just the way it works.  So when you're going 20 - 0 on battle with your MW Danish GS and an archer stops you in your tracks with an arrow to the head, just remember that it's what an archer is meant to do.  Kill the 2h heroes of the enemy team, because most one handers or polearmers can't do it themselves, it's how the fucking game was made and that's how it's been played since vanilla Mount and Blade, archers are good at killing people without shields.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on January 24, 2013, 08:17:38 pm
Stop trying to ruin their fun Artyem, they should be able to 1 versus the entire enemy team
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tzar on January 24, 2013, 08:17:40 pm
lol 2h Cruthers haha :D your not better yourself when u start saying stewpid sheeet like that  :wink:
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Artyem on January 24, 2013, 08:22:55 pm
I probably should have included something about any old melee infantry being able to use a crossbow flawlessly without needing any WPF, which makes a pretty good counter to ranged and cavalry in my opinion.

Also, all of that is coming from someone who's been playing cRPG since it damn near came out, I played 2h for the first year and a half on my main and just recently started experimenting with 1h and polearm.  Now I have a specific alt that I use to be a giant bundle of sticks, high strength - mid agi (21 - 15, 24 - 12) with a bastard sword is just pure murder.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Grumbs on January 24, 2013, 08:32:19 pm
I probably should have included something about any old melee infantry being able to use a crossbow flawlessly without needing any WPF, which makes a pretty good counter to ranged and cavalry in my opinion.

Ranged counters ranged? I would be a hypocrite if I took advantage of xbows with my build. They should have requirements or there should be more incentive to put all wpf into melee
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tydeus on January 24, 2013, 08:55:36 pm
Ranged counters ranged? I would be a hypocrite if I took advantage of xbows with my build. They should have requirements or there should be more incentive to put all wpf into melee
It's a really shitty argument anyway, don't bother dwelling on the thing. "Shot by arrows? Get a shield." If you're saying that the only alternative is to change your class, then you have just admitted to there being a design flaw. Unfortunately this is a video game. When 2hers were popular irl, so was heavy armor that made it hard for projectiles to penetrate. M&B and cRPG in particular mix 12th-15th century themes and because of this, they have bred the scenario we currently have, with 2hers being extremely vulnerable to ranged weapons. This is how it has to be though. We're stuck with smaller scale battles with much less organization and anything else would likely make ranged practically obsolete.

There are too many factors in this game that work contrary to real life for us to likely ever fix the problem. Two-Handers have to realize there isn't really any alternative and archers have to realize that the simple ability to even penetrate plate armor with the bows and arrows that they often use, means that they already have balance catered towards them. The situation is as it has to be, so grow thicker skin and drone out the 2h vs archer vs 2h lobbyism, like many of us already have.

*When I say 2h, I simply mean any melee character that doesn't have the ability to use a shield, like pikemen*
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Smoothrich on January 24, 2013, 09:04:09 pm
Ranged counters ranged? I would be a hypocrite if I took advantage of xbows with my build. They should have requirements or there should be more incentive to put all wpf into melee

That's pretty much the main problem of cRPG balance.

Infantry is countered by cav, ranged, and infantry.
Cav is countered by ranged, cav, infantry.
Ranged is countered by Other Ranged Only.

Ranged is more powerful in almost every scenario 1 vs 1 against all other classes.  Only possible counter is a shielder that never looks away for a split second but that is unrealistic.  They 2 shot horses, ignore armor rating, insta kill on headshots, with no nerfs to spin shooting like other "support" classes (pikes, mauls.)

Their damage scales from WPF, PD/PT, bow looms, and ammo looms.  All these sources of extra damage and accuracy makes ranged curve up in power way more dramatically then melee classes at the high-end of looms and levels.

My Solution:  Reduce the effectiveness of pierce ranged damage against armor.  Heavy cav, balanced/agi builds in heavy armor should be good, logical counters to ranged.  However your armor rating is realistically meaningless against the way every archer is massive stacked pierce, and all throwing axes hit like throwing spears.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: rufio on January 24, 2013, 09:09:09 pm
Panos/zlisch I have a question :P What classes do you respect?

both run arround naked most of the time, and spend more time on forum than ingame.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on January 24, 2013, 09:16:26 pm
Panos/zlisch I have a question :P What classes do you respect?
Archers who don't kite and got a decent melee/archer build, throwers who don't kite, crossbowmen who don't kite and don't stand waiting at some corner for an easy kill, people who don't wear medium armor, horsethrowers who don't delay, horsearchers/xbowmen who go in for the bumps at each shot in order to give their enemies some fair chance unless the other guy is also a ranged and of course don't delay, cav who neither spawnrape, delay, or stab at backs, people who don't use twohanded weapons, people who don't use the longest swingable poles and hold S while wearing the heaviest gear possible (not overpowered, just really gay), shielders who don't wear one of the eternal hp (not talking 13 shield skill practice shields but steel shields or boards) and just hold block for half an hour and then hit when your enemy is asleep, people who worship Mork the Goat God and none of those heathen "gods" that some other groups have taken a liking to.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on January 24, 2013, 09:18:03 pm
both run arround naked most of the time, and spend more time on forum than ingame.
Funny 'cause wrong and you're slightly retarded, and I wouldn't spend more time on the forum than ingame if I didn't have the forum open in other windows when I'm playing c-rpg/watching tv.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Joseph Porta on January 24, 2013, 10:24:32 pm
These are the stats:
weapon length: 84
weight: 2
difficulty: 12
speed rating: 95
weapon length: 84
thrust damage: 0 pierce
swing damage: 32 cut
slots: 1
Bonus against Shield
Secondary Mode

Pretty sure speed and dmg is 2+ in 2h mode though.
I guess a reason to not take it is the extra weight that will slow you down noticeably.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Kalam on January 24, 2013, 10:29:33 pm
From a 'class' point of view, the game is generally well balanced these days. Just compare cRPG to just about any game. It's on DotA levels of balance, here. If not better. The only issue is strength vs. agility balance and how shitty shielders are. Since I'm neither, it's all good to me. Yeah, that's bad, but it's time to look forward. At Melee.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Falka on January 24, 2013, 10:39:15 pm
shielders who don't hold block for half an hour and then hit when your enemy is asleep

You got + from me just because of that, I hate these guys even more than gayplites  :wink:
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Angantyr on January 24, 2013, 11:18:40 pm
To be fair, anyone who earnestly cries 'OP!' about this or that class or weapon in cRPG's current state is just a bad player, plays way too much to have a real clear picture, or is highly biased for some reason or another, usually kids who think everyone should reform to their view of what is good sportsmanship, 'cool' or not, known a lot of these and used to know a ninja who sincerely thought that everyone who didn't use light armor and any weapon shorter than katana was a nub and if he lost to anyone not living up to these criteria he would blame their OP equipment for their victory. See a lot of that mentality here, on a daily basis.. Weapons, classes, it's all situational, and with the current group > individual mechanics it often boils down to who has the most clan mates behind him to pub stomp with (especially evident on EU1).
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Grumbs on January 24, 2013, 11:47:48 pm
Nothing can ever be truly OP with that mindset. Everything is balanced, everyone is just complaining about classes or builds that kill them..

There are issues with aspects of the game. Putting your head in the sand and saying everything balances because its a-symmetrical balance will never push the mod forward.

I do think there are people who are selfish and only want to kill as much as possible and have the game as easy as they can get it, and that applies to all classes. But I don't think that should mean you just abandon the idea of balance and listening to feedback. The devs have to play the game themselves and look at several different aspects to improve balance. The forums can only give them ideas but will never create a solid picture for them to balance around
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Angantyr on January 25, 2013, 12:10:03 am
Certainly there's imbalances here and there and they should be reported and at least an attempt should be made at an objective discussion. Above I'm referring to the strong anti-whatever campaigns that are continuesly fuelled here, in my view nothing is that game-breaking anymore.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Smoothrich on January 25, 2013, 01:07:56 am
For actual balance, you should create a subforum that is invite only, and select a few dozen "good players" from NA and EU, who can construct sentences, talk numbers, play different classes, and have reasonable conversations.  These people can test new balance/mechanics changes on beta servers, and have lively discussions and give advice to the balance team.  Lots of game experience, knowledge of game mechanics, and a high level of skill would all be expected. 

Most games like Dota listen to their competitive scene or other top skilled players, along with having beta-testing open to a small part of the skilled community already.  This is clearly lacking in cRPG, with mountains of garbage being posted by "low skilled pubbies" on every page with no real discussion happening.

The public balance forum can be merged with the realism discussion, and people like Panos can type their 10,000 word manifestos about the L0lstAB!1 there, while people who are trying to make the game more fun and fair for everyone can talk somewhere else.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Panos on January 25, 2013, 01:22:23 am
Panos/zlisch I have a question :P What classes do you respect?

I respect 2handers like Jormglorm, everytime I duel that dude even though he kicks my ass I feel happy because a) he doesnt abuze and he uses footwork and b) my skill raises a bit.

I respect archers like bagge and tenne, both of them will never run like  little my old friends and always stay and melee you and they are pretty good at melee.

And in general I respect players who are trully good in the game, some examples, chase, muffin, gurnisson , polepoop, Ive seen those guys playing all classes and doing good if not perfect.


And to answer to rufio, I play naked you little whinning my old friend, because I have to leech some gold to buy some MW shit, no worries this will be my last generation that I  leech. You`ll see after that what happens.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Grumbs on January 25, 2013, 01:41:03 am
I respect 2handers like Jormglorm, everytime I duel that dude even though he kicks my ass I feel happy because a) he doesnt abuze and he uses footwork and b) my skill raises a bit.

I respect archers like bagge and tenne, both of them will never run like  little my old friends and always stay and melee you and they are pretty good at melee.

And in general I respect players who are trully good in the game, some examples, chase, muffin, gurnisson , polepoop, Ive seen those guys playing all classes and doing good if not perfect.


And to answer to rufio, I play naked you little whinning my old friend, because I have to leech some gold to buy some MW shit, no worries this will be my last generation that I  leech. You`ll see after that what happens.

I'm quite conflicted when it comes to this stuff. Players that know how to win are playing the game as it's designed better than other players. If you win then you played the game better, it doesn't matter about self constructed "fair play".

So you can blame the game rather than the player. On the other hand people have an expectation of "fun" while gaming. I respect good players, regardless of how they achieve their goals. Respect is the wrong word, maybe hold in higher esteem...Having fun can include not being bored by another players gameplay, not being beaten by "cheap" things that allow the player to exploit inherent strengths of a class without having to compete against other players.

Panos your point where "fun" gets interrupted by other people playing to win is different to mine. I mostly don't give a damn about the way people use melee abilities to win. I see it as fair use of game mechanics. 2 hand stab, backpeddle (to an extent), side swing spam, whatever. If it wins a melee fight then its fair game. Ranged is a whole other beast that relies on having an intrinsic ability that other classes don't have. You get a huge tactical advantage that they would be fools to neglect, but at the same time it spoils the gameplay when there is little depth in the counters, or the counters involve boring gameplay like hiding or waiting for flags

So its no wonder people make full use of ranged mechanics in this game. Its a smart way to win as the game is designed atm. I won't because the gameplay of ranged bores me, and I don't want to add to the amount of ranged in the game
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: woody on January 25, 2013, 01:57:32 am
What makes me laugh is ranged who get upset when you kill them in melee saying "Im just an archer stop picking on me" when they've been 1 shotting you for 15 mins.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Panos on January 25, 2013, 02:33:57 am
I'm quite conflicted when it comes to this stuff. Players that know how to win are playing the game as it's designed better than other players. If you win then you played the game better, it doesn't matter about self constructed "fair play".

So you can blame the game rather than the player. On the other hand people have an expectation of "fun" while gaming. I respect good players, regardless of how they achieve their goals. Respect is the wrong word, maybe hold in higher esteem...Having fun can include not being bored by another players gameplay, not being beaten by "cheap" things that allow the player to exploit inherent strengths of a class without having to compete against other players.

Panos your point where "fun" gets interrupted by other people playing to win is different to mine. I mostly don't give a damn about the way people use melee abilities to win. I see it as fair use of game mechanics. 2 hand stab, backpeddle (to an extent), side swing spam, whatever. If it wins a melee fight then its fair game. Ranged is a whole other beast that relies on having an intrinsic ability that other classes don't have. You get a huge tactical advantage that they would be fools to neglect, but at the same time it spoils the gameplay when there is little depth in the counters, or the counters involve boring gameplay like hiding or waiting for flags

So its no wonder people make full use of ranged mechanics in this game. Its a smart way to win as the game is designed atm. I won't because the gameplay of ranged bores me, and I don't want to add to the amount of ranged in the game

No mate, exploiting to win is as bad as taking money from the table that`s not your`s, besides these things that I`m desperaterly yelling to change , are broken and everyone knows it, or at least people who can value when a game is played fair and when not.

But the thing is that this broken mechanics can be fixed and then we can talk about fair and square skill.

Anyway, today I realized that I`m just wasting my time trying to bring total balance to the game since it`s clear obvious that kuyak heroes rule the mod and we will never have balanced classes.

I guess I was dumb enough to try and convince people that lolstab is the most abusive and retarded animation that a game engine have ever offered to a game.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Grumbs on January 25, 2013, 03:56:46 am
I would try to play with the assumption that 2 handers have a strong stab ability. There is game theory in this. You know he has a strong stab, and you can know its strengths and weaknesses and can play to counter it. If I see a stab animation I have a direct counter that is always available that removes 100% of the damage, and not only that I can then follow up with my own move that can have a guaranteed attack window where he has to defend himself. I can choose to make an attack, hold an attack and see what he does, hold right attack while circling to his left and see if he can't block, change position towards a team mate and see if he over extends, pretend I lose focus on him, feint an attack and attack the same direction on any number of feints, or change direction whenever etc. Good players won't care that the stab is strong, they will play to counter it if they see it as a threat (I don't necessarily, I think its just generally a good attack in the right situation). If you get outnumbered then you did something wrong. If you fail a block you made a skill mistake. Misjudged the extent of your or the enemies attack then you can only blame yourself. You have to take the combat as a whole rather than zero in on one ability like the stab. I don't think the 2 hand stab supersedes all the other stuff you can do in melee. I'm not saying that nothing in melee can be OP, but there is some leeway due to all the other things involved in it

Thats only from my perspective as I play. You then have the enemies reaction to what he anticipates me to be doing. Theres definitely a layer of depth in melee that gets close to game theory for me. The pacing is slow enough and contains enough variables that can allow for this type of gameplay.

When it comes to ranged, I just feel like its shallow and devoid of a lot of the stuff that makes M&B a unique pvp style game.

About exploits being similar to taking money off a table...I don't really agree as every 2 hander has the opportunity within the confines of the actual game. Taking money off a table is more akin to turning someone's computer off as they are playing. Its outside the confines of the game. There is a grey area with exploits, but general game mechanics that are available to everyone without modifying the game are all fair game to me. If there are tricks to things well you just need to learn them or learn to counter them. If the devs want to change anything they can, but until then you have to play the game as its designed

I'm not trying to make out M&B is a super complex strategic game. I am a lot of the time just going around hitting people when they are in a weak situation. But I do it to try to win the round, I don't care if that makes it unfair. I see it as exploiting other people's mistakes or lack of awareness. I don't care if you died through something I did that was unfair, I did it to win the round. If I played ranged I would feel the same I'm sure, and I can see why ranged players would want to protect that gameplay that brings them success. Its just not "fun" for a lot of players. At least in melee people can by and large only blame themselves when they get in bad positions or have bad teamplay or whatever else they do. In ranged gameplay its very one sided and lacking the depth of melee counters and on the fly decision making

Again not making out I play cRPG like this all the time or that melee always has a lot of depth, just trying to point out that you're more likely to find hidden depth in melee than in ranged, and that renders some seemingly OP melee abilities unimportant.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: rufio on January 25, 2013, 04:43:47 am
And to answer to rufio, I play naked you little whinning my old friend, because I have to leech some gold to buy some MW shit, no worries this will be my last generation that I  leech. You`ll see after that what happens.

oh snap, ok fairyboy come duel me eu3 , you pick weapons and builds and we stf that shit, il whoop your silly ass across the whole map and show you whos a whiny bitch. 8-)

*edit , you also get to pick gear, probably will be a dress or some other fairy shit, but itl be worth it once i get to bath in your tears and hear your shitty excuses.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Tears of Destiny on January 25, 2013, 04:48:25 am
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Teeth on January 25, 2013, 09:45:14 am
Because cav can go anywhere and because ranged can attack anywhere, whereas a footman is restricted to going where his little feet can take him and attacking who his little arms can reach. This leaves the poor footman to often feel like he is drawing the short end of the stick.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Grumpy_Nic on January 25, 2013, 09:58:09 am
Because cav can go anywhere and because ranged can attack anywhere, whereas a footman is restricted to going where his little feet can take him and attacking who his little arms can reach. This leaves the poor footman to often feel like he is drawing the short end of the stick.

Every little footman can press "Esc" & "Quit". An alternative would be the "Respec" or "Retirement" button on his char page.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Vibe on January 25, 2013, 10:02:53 am
Every little footman can press "Esc" & "Quit". An alternative would be the "Respec" or "Retirement" button on his char page.

hahaha no

I do recommend the "unscrubize" button for all the ranged players though.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: JohanE on January 25, 2013, 01:25:19 pm
Just go to the duelserver, hand in hand, 2h my old friends.
Title: Re: Lobbyism
Post by: Leshma on January 25, 2013, 01:53:23 pm
Just go to the duelserver, hand in hand, 2h my old friends.

There's a reason why you don't see me on nditions native duel server. I don't like duels and if whole point of this game was dueling I would never play it.

I actually like archers, there's nothing better than killing you schmucks from behind :D