cRPG

Strategus => Strategus General Discussion => Topic started by: GOBBLINKINGREATLEADER on February 17, 2014, 09:10:42 pm

Title: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: GOBBLINKINGREATLEADER on February 17, 2014, 09:10:42 pm
A destrier alone is 2,150 silver. That's as much as 60+ armor loomed plate. I thought most of the complaints about prices in the last strategus were about upper tier equipment like plate, steel picks, flamberges, armored horses, etc, in every battle. In my opinion a destrier is like the standard horse to a cRPG cavalry player, neither heavy or light, and affordable in NA_1.

My opinion on horse pricing is that destriers should be a bit cheaper than they are, but the heavy horses can still be as expensive as fuck like they are now. You're nerfing cavalry in strategus hard, and I feel like it's going to be several months before I can even think of playing my class in battles. I feel like horses didn't rise in price on a scale that discourages heavy gear but allows normal/slightly light gear, instead all horses just rose super high because of the formula that was used to raise prices this strat.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Kalam on February 17, 2014, 09:13:02 pm
Destriers are heavy, as far as I'm concerned. o.o
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: GOBBLINKINGREATLEADER on February 17, 2014, 09:16:46 pm
I mean, I used to think that the rouncey was a pretty average horse but ever since the charge change/nerf months ago it has felt like a rouncey can't even fucking knock a person down unless if you are going full speed head on at them. God forbid if anyone is next to them, you lose all your momentum on the first person and get stopped on the second. It's awful. If it weren't for that, I might consider the rouncey the normal horse.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: KaMiKaZe_JoE on February 17, 2014, 09:26:22 pm
Oooh good I won't be able to play this round. Fuck cav bunch of shitty baddies.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: GOBBLINKINGREATLEADER on February 17, 2014, 10:02:22 pm
If the third option on this poll doesn't win I'm going to be really bummed.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Keshian on February 17, 2014, 10:51:04 pm
Its like strat 2, you are fighting people in light armor not plate, so yes the rouncey does serious damage.  Also, you buy a bunch of rouncies and only 1 or 2 out of 10 horses you buy is a destrier or other warhorse for your elite cav.  And yes horses will run out and cav will have to fight on foot.  You will have legitimate tradeoffs and shortages unlike last strat and will have to make hard choices.  Buy cheaper weapons and armor so you can buy more horses may be your choice.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on February 17, 2014, 11:35:40 pm
Destriers are heavy, as far as I'm concerned. o.o

In NA1 or EU1 where you can just spawn on another horse in a couple minutes, sure.  In strat, they are not (when you're trying to stay alive on that horse for an hour if you can).  Armored horses are the only heavy horses.  Starting at Barded horses (which are pretty weak in strategus battles). 

I didn't stay long enough in a fief, and won't be in one for another 15 hours or so.  So 1 destrier, literally costs as much 60 of "plate" body armor?  That can't be right...

I agree they should be expensive if the heavier armors are a lot more expensive...(having heavy horses vs light armor is pretty OP). 

But GK makes a good point about the ridiculous ability of "light" horses (like the rouncey) to run over more than one person.  If you try to run over 2 people who are closer than 5 feet apart, your rouncey will stop in place. 
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Dach on February 18, 2014, 12:00:56 am
We're playing peasant war for a while, so get used to it! :mrgreen:

And yes a rouncey is a basic horse probably more used for sport or travel, it's not a war horse. So don't expect them to go trample over rank of peoples.  :wink:
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Bryggan on February 18, 2014, 04:52:51 am
Wikipedi says this about destriers:

"A good destrier was expensive. 7th century Salic law gives a price of 12 solidi as weregild, or reparational payment, for a war horse, compared to 3 solidi for a sound mare or 1 solidus for a cow. In later centuries destriers became even more expensive: the average value of each of the horses in a company of 22 knights and squires in the county of Flanders in 1297 compares to the price of seven normal coursers.[13] The price of these destriers varied between 20 and 300 livres parisis (parisian pounds), compared to 5 to 12 livres for a normal courser."

Still, its hard to play cav effectively without a 75% chance of getting your horse killed.  If you run around then go park it at your spawn point (or some other safe-ish spot) when its nearly dead will it still be considered killed at the end of the game?  Or is it considered gone once its taken out of the inventory?  The bad thing about that is you'd have about 25 wounded horses wandering around your spawn point.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: imisshotmail on February 18, 2014, 05:03:59 am
It's fair that a Destrier is so expensive, every army is going to have mass rounceys anyway for speed bonus, so cavalry will always be able to use those and with a rouncey you can easily do better than melee players even if it isn't a good horse by any means. Horses being expensive is fine now that you can select certain people to use certain gear, a good player on a warhorse can do very well and pay for the cost of that horse multiple times over, them being expensive is only a problem if you have bads using them which of course is solved now.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: GOBBLINKINGREATLEADER on February 18, 2014, 05:12:59 am
I honestly don't think half of the community wanted this rubbish with assigning equipment to players. The devs increased micro-managing when I think on the whole the community wanted it lessened.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Lt_Anders on February 18, 2014, 05:51:03 am
Horses should be balanced a bit more on strat.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: MURDERTRON on February 18, 2014, 07:09:21 am
Kind of a shitty mechanic because any horse that spawns is automatically counted as dead, so you lose whatever % of them anyway.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: PhantomZero on February 18, 2014, 07:20:15 am
I honestly don't think half of the community wanted this rubbish with assigning equipment to players. The devs increased micro-managing when I think on the whole the community wanted it lessened.

They may have increased micro managing but only for battles, and this is something i've been looking forward to for a long time. Too often people just take whatever gear they want, despite leaders saying "HEY DONT TAKE THAT PLATE!"

This plus anonymizing battle rosters goes a long way to increase the ability to hire mercs rather than relying on your own soldiers. Maybe not helpful for large clans but small ones that can't make up the entire roster every battle benefit from this the most imo.

Horses are a force multiplier and are pretty shitty to use with things like ladders on the ground and wooden stakes. Alone, horses are pretty easily hard-countered.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Keshian on February 18, 2014, 07:37:37 am
Thing is pikes and long spears also frihtfully expensive and most of the longer polearms.  So most of the hard counters to cav are nonexistent or very rare in most fights.  So rouncey riders will have more free rein than you hing.  Stakes will almost never appear until people have more discretionary funds.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: PhantomZero on February 18, 2014, 07:43:28 am
Thing is pikes and long spears also frihtfully expensive and most of the longer polearms.  So most of the hard counters to cav are nonexistent or very rare in most fights.  So rouncey riders will have more free rein than you hing.  Stakes will almost never appear until people have more discretionary funds.

Bamboo spears are cheap, and fauchards can work in a pinch if you are fighting rounceys.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: GOBBLINKINGREATLEADER on February 18, 2014, 08:00:04 am
Yeah Kesh but now literally any pierce polearm stab--even a 2h in polearm mode, I've heard--can rear a horse. A fucking shortened spear can rear a horse.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Jack1 on February 18, 2014, 01:58:50 pm
Any polarm or halfswording over 100 length and a pierce stab.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: chadz on February 18, 2014, 02:02:43 pm
I don't think the weapon stuff is increased micromanagement, because it's 100% optional. Do nothing, and it's just like in previous strat, everyone uses everything. But you have the option of controlling who gets what a bit.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Lt_Anders on February 18, 2014, 02:26:54 pm
I don't think the weapon stuff is increased micromanagement, because it's 100% optional. Do nothing, and it's just like in previous strat, everyone uses everything. But you have the option of controlling who gets what a bit.

I like the management(i guess? to early to tell), but you gotta fix the horse prices. I can just buy plate armor long before I buy horses. You're killing off a class for strat almost entirely for at least half of the current strat round.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: chadz on February 18, 2014, 02:49:19 pm
I'm not adjusting prices just yet, but I will probably change some class prices individually (first and foremost construction stuff)
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Torben on February 18, 2014, 02:54:17 pm
Yeah Kesh but now literally any pierce polearm stab--even a 2h in polearm mode, I've heard--can rear a horse. A fucking shortened spear can rear a horse.

as ive read this is true,  however low damage stabs and glances do not rear the horse,  buffing heavy cav a lot.  i really like that (although im a light cav player)
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Gurnisson on February 18, 2014, 03:10:36 pm
and with a rouncey you can easily do better than melee players even if it isn't a good horse by any means.

Much easier to carry teams as infantry.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Butan on February 18, 2014, 03:42:37 pm
I dont think there should be re-scale in favor of horses.

You can have plate infantry armies before you have heavy cavalrymen, and how that is a problem?
A good balanced army of infantry-cavalry will rape a plate focused infantry army any day on a open battlefield.

Also there is good medium-heavy horses available at affordable prices (when comparing with plate) : barded warhorse and destrier.



The construction materials need re-scaling yes, else we will not see a single weapon rack/respawn tent in months. But even if there was no re-scale, I trust players to try their best at trade-milking as fast as possible to make everything important available.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: imisshotmail on February 18, 2014, 03:58:18 pm
Much easier to carry teams as infantry.

Not true at all if you are good at cavalry, but there is very few who are.
(this is even with completely disregarding the fact that when cav are not on their horse they are just melee players with a slightly worse build)
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Gurnisson on February 18, 2014, 05:39:19 pm
Not true at all if you are good at cavalry, but there is very few who are.
(this is even with completely disregarding the fact that when cav are not on their horse they are just melee players with a slightly worse build)

We're talking strategus battles here. If you really believe a good cavalry player has more influence on a strategus battle than an infantry (as skilled as him), then I don't know what to say. That's not true at all from my experience. I would top all field battles as cavalry, but I could influence much more as an infantry pikeman or shielder.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Jack1 on February 18, 2014, 05:55:33 pm
Wait a sec, are you talking about how you feel in game or when you look at a roster you think"he's good but he's only cav"?

In terms of effectiveness I think that cav are the make or break point in a field battle.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Butan on February 18, 2014, 06:06:54 pm
We're talking strategus battles here. If you really believe a good cavalry player has more influence on a strategus battle than an infantry (as skilled as him), then I don't know what to say. That's not true at all from my experience. I would top all field battles as cavalry, but I could influence much more as an infantry pikeman or shielder.

(click to show/hide)

I have a more balanced opinion of strategus battles experiences.


It is right that a few very aware and dedicated spearmen can perfectly overcome any uncoordinated -or even organised- cavalry charges, but those few very aware and dedicated spearmen are not always here or battle-ready for various reasons (not rostering, battle time and duration, personal exhaustion, leader under using them, bad item selection, bad map).

Then if the cavalry opposing them is sufficient in quality and number, even those excellent spearmen wont be able to cover the whole battlefield, and the cavalry will be able to greatly support their infantry with bump and slash and backstabbing couchs/whatever.



Basically, I have had various experiences in battle where cavalry was present where the general feeling would range from :

- where is their cavalry ? (reading: not efficient for X reasons, thus raped and under-represented)
- their cavalry is raping us! (reading: efficient for X reasons, thus bumping and harassing greatly)



Also need to take into account cavalry vs cavalry metagame, sometimes even if you have good spearmen and "interdict" group of infantry to be bumped, cavalry can still rape YOUR cavalry, which will use up tickets and work in favor of a overall victory.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on February 18, 2014, 07:52:01 pm
Wait a sec, are you talking about how you feel in game or when you look at a roster you think"he's good but he's only cav"?

In terms of effectiveness I think that cav are the make or break point in a field battle.

On rounceys?

You'd rather have one destrier or 60 people in plate armor?  There is a right and wrong answer here, and it's glaringly obvious. 

Also any polearm (or half-sword in polearm mode) that has pierce stab can rear horses now.  Horses are going to be used like they are in NA1 or EU1, only to back stab or pick off stragglers.  Good bye cavalry charges (which were already retarded to begin with). 

Also about gear assigning, I think that's amazing.  You can effectively stop yourself from being item bombed (just assign shitty/excess gear to level 11 or 0, I forget which).  And then you can allow your best players to use the best equipment.  I think it would be cool to have peasant armies with 2 heroes in heavier mail or plate armor.  It might even feel more like medieval battles, where only a select few are wearing good equipment, and the rest are using much cheaper gear.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Corsair831 on February 18, 2014, 08:16:06 pm
keep horses expensive, horses are absolutely essential to winning field battles; something which gives you a huge advantage like that should be a choice

"do i spend my money on better armour/weapons or armoured horses?"

really love the new price scaling system, especially for horses (and this is coming from a faction leader who intends to fight a lot of field battles)
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: chadz on February 18, 2014, 08:16:22 pm
just assign shitty/excess gear to level 11 or 0, I forget which

11, 0 is default (everyone can use it)
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Keshian on February 18, 2014, 08:29:57 pm

You'd rather have one destrier or 60 people in plate armor?  There is a right and wrong answer here, and it's glaringly obvious. 


Embellishing a bit?  More like 50 destriers or 65 plate armor.  Both have their advantages and real tradeoffs.  personally i would do 25 destriers, 75 rouncies, and 100 mid-tier armor for them instead for the same amount and then assign who can use the destriers.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: GOBBLINKINGREATLEADER on February 18, 2014, 08:32:32 pm
I just want to point out that there's a good chance I wouldn't have made this thread if the rouncey was actually worth more than a really greasy wet fart. As things stand, the rouncey has been a pretty rough horse to use ever since whenever it was like 8 months ago when the charge/bump/whatever mechanic was changed. Since then you are IMMENSELY LUCKY if you can use a rouncey to knock down two people, even if theres a few feet between them and you hit the first one at the maximum speed your horse can have.

It is just immensely frustrating as a cavalry player when the horse you are using comes to a complete stop and your life is over just because you incidentally struck a second player. If the rouncey got a very slight buff to charge, just enough to fix this issue, I would be satisfied. My problem isn't that the affordable horses will be easy to kill or slow, my problem is that they cannot even do what I think horses are intended to do.

@Keshian, I think cracka is just really, really bad at math and that he didn't mean to embellish. It's just that he is not good at math.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Corsair831 on February 18, 2014, 08:42:03 pm
I just want to point out that there's a good chance I wouldn't have made this thread if the rouncey was actually worth more than a really greasy wet fart. As things stand, the rouncey has been a pretty rough horse to use ever since whenever it was like 8 months ago when the charge/bump/whatever mechanic was changed. Since then you are IMMENSELY LUCKY if you can use a rouncey to knock down two people, even if theres a few feet between them and you hit the first one at the maximum speed your horse can have.

It is just immensely frustrating as a cavalry player when the horse you are using comes to a complete stop and your life is over just because you incidentally struck a second player. If the rouncey got a very slight buff to charge, just enough to fix this issue, I would be satisfied. My problem isn't that the affordable horses will be easy to kill or slow, my problem is that they cannot even do what I think horses are intended to do.

@Keshian, I think cracka is just really, really bad at math and that he didn't mean to embellish. It's just that he is not good at math.

you can hold a couched great lance on it right? :P
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on February 18, 2014, 09:47:26 pm
Embellishing a bit?  More like 50 destriers or 65 plate armor.  Both have their advantages and real tradeoffs.  personally i would do 25 destriers, 75 rouncies, and 100 mid-tier armor for them instead for the same amount and then assign who can use the destriers.



I'm not the one embellishing, I said I wasn't in a fief so I didn't see the prices in a previous post, I'm taking the OP's word for it.

Dear diary, today OP was a f...

That being said, I am really really bad at math, but I can still do the basic maths...

A destrier alone is 2,150 silver. That's as much as 60+ armor loomed plate.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: MURDERTRON on February 18, 2014, 09:56:32 pm
you can hold a couched great lance on it right? :P

Yes.  For shit damage and never being to couch up the slightest incline.  The couching nerfs are going to show the most here, all because someone thinks the fastest horse shouldn't be able to one hit kill couch.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Butan on February 18, 2014, 10:29:45 pm
To avoid more derping I decided to post this to help the discussion:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Dach on February 18, 2014, 10:34:02 pm
Price are fine, and people are bad at math... deal with it!  8-)
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Lt_Anders on February 18, 2014, 10:58:25 pm
Price are fine, and people are bad at math... deal with it!  8-)

Sadly you don't play cav, nor understand what those prices mean.

Destrier is the "effective" equivalence of a mid tier medium armor, rouncey the equivalent of a upper light, and anything past large goes into "plate" equivalent.

You can only bump 1 person with a rouncey unless it's loomed and you have 7 rinding in which case you can, if lucky, get 2 bumps. Just yesterday, I reared a ROUNCEY in peltastos armor, taking NO damage just by getting BUMPED right after the first guy. That's why Destrier are the "mainline" horse. Bumping is pathetic on anything below that...
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on February 18, 2014, 11:03:41 pm
Yeah prices seem fine to me (compared to the price of armor).  They might be a little expensive...but we'll see.

Anders, this does suck for cav (like myself) but you can't compare "medium horse value" vs "medium armor value".  It's apples and oranges.  A destrier should be worth heavy mail/light plate armor. 

You are right about anything less than destrier's charge values (even destrier can suck if you run into more than 2 people in a row at full speed).  Cavalry will just have to be "light cavalry" and be relegated to back stabbing stragglers, protecting flags, or dinking around with enemy cavalry (aka being useless together!)
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Gurnisson on February 18, 2014, 11:45:26 pm
Wait a sec, are you talking about how you feel in game or when you look at a roster you think"he's good but he's only cav"?

In terms of effectiveness I think that cav are the make or break point in a field battle.

No, cavalry are very effective in field battles, it's just very rare that it's the work of the cavalry that makes or breaks a battle. Getting the best infantry (and decent tactics) is by far the most important from my experience in strategus.
Title: Re: Does anyone else think horse price scaled too hard?
Post by: Jack1 on February 18, 2014, 11:54:15 pm
Well than NA varies from EU immensely. For example: no matter how well you guard your forward spawn and how well you place it Internet explorer will get it and a battle is pretty much over without a forward spawn. Also how people like develuze are more than able to get 100+ kills.

In EU I have gotten top kills many times, although, most of the top scores were when I fought for the conquorers.