cRPG

cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Topic started by: Sari on March 14, 2014, 04:57:50 pm

Title: Rear length
Post by: Sari on March 14, 2014, 04:57:50 pm
2hs can now rear horses while in polearm mode, please change the rear length.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: Latvian on March 14, 2014, 05:52:25 pm
i almost shit myslef today when i was riding in full speed with my plated charger and agi troll with shortened spear reared my horse....i dont get why almost everything can rear horses now.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: Eugene on March 14, 2014, 06:56:53 pm
Revert to 140 pls
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on March 14, 2014, 07:47:45 pm
I think it was a dumb change and way too drastic.  "They" said the other side of the coin is that glancing blows with rearing weapons no longer rear horses.  Apparently that's a nerf to polearms that they can no longer glance and still rear a horse, so to make up for it, anything that has polearm mode with pierce stab can rear a horse...seems kind of drastic to me. 
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: PsychoTwins on March 14, 2014, 08:07:47 pm
I dont know guys, I have tried to do the 2h into pole thrust rear and most of the time the cav just hit me before I can even reach them.

Seems like it just promotes more careful cav gameplay instead of just charging into a whole team. BUT it also looks like non-lancer cav are kinda fucked because lancers can hit you before you reach them, but 2h/1h cav have to get real close to bumpslash you or even reach you, so overall it seems like a "nerf" to the bumpslash tactic the devilize has become known for.

Atm the glance thing is a nice add in but once all the 2h'ers actually start hitting X and using the polearm mode, cav will be fucked.

TL:DR: I think the rear length should stay the same for poles as the glance thing sorta balances it out, but 2h alternate polearm mode shouldnt have the ability to rear cav as it makes 2h even more master race and fucks over the cav.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: JasonPastman on March 14, 2014, 08:11:37 pm
Seems like it just promotes more careful cav gameplay instead of just charging into a whole team.

Yea this fucks over heavy cav pretty good.  As for us light cav this is how we had to play anywayz.

I dont know guys, I have tried to do the 2h into pole thrust rear and most of the time the cav just hit me before I can even reach them.

Cuz bad?
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: PsychoTwins on March 14, 2014, 08:16:39 pm
Cuz bad?

I prefer the phrase "CavIsHard"  :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: JasonPastman on March 14, 2014, 08:29:07 pm
I prefer the phrase "CavIsHard"  :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Should be harder now. 

But on that note I doubt you could handle a generation of proper melee cav.

People talk trash, but cav are a minority here and us that play melee, light cav, with untrollish builds which lean towards agility and thus riding, seem far fewer then any other class at least on NA1.  People talk much trash yet so few actually play the class.  When I read the phrase I think mad cuz bad when we are so easy to kill.

Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: PsychoTwins on March 14, 2014, 08:34:34 pm
Should be harder now. 

But on that note I doubt you could handle a generation of proper melee cav.

People talk trash, but cav are a minority here and us that play melee, light cav, with untrollish builds which lean towards agility and thus riding, seem far fewer then any other class at least on NA1.  People talk much trash yet so few actually play the class.  When I read the phrase I think mad cuz bad when we are so easy to kill.

I say it because it invokes the exact response you gave me :P

Do the same thing for ranged on my RangedIsHard character. No hard feelings, just like messing with them. Also it's why my name is 20PingIsHardBob while I have about 20 ping myself  :mrgreen:
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: JasonPastman on March 14, 2014, 08:41:02 pm
So make a Cavishard character.  Imo cav battles are most epic and why I'm still here after 3 years. Also, with a 20 ping as with every other class in this game you'll have a huge advantage.

If your really feeling bold go 0IF 5PS like me.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: PsychoTwins on March 14, 2014, 08:46:53 pm
Already been doing that, but name is U_Wot_M8_ atm. 15/24 Lancer. Its actually pretty fun. Haven't e-peen a SS of it yet but I do decently well with my ping, but 20 ping is all skill  :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: San on March 14, 2014, 08:54:34 pm
1h/2h cav aren't really any worse off than before. Normal 2h stab is harder to deal with in most cases, making complaints against polearm 2h mode silly from my perspective. The shorter length rearing is good at preventing mindless charges, but on the flip side, polearms can't just flail their stab everywhere and hope to rear. You need to plan ahead. Cav is still one of the easiest and most rewarding classes once you understand what to do, but it takes a few days to a week to learn. You're in control of your own risk/reward most of the time.

It's difficult to force glances on the lighter horses, however. I think the heavier horses benefited from it more than they should have in comparison to light horses.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: imisshotmail on March 14, 2014, 09:11:21 pm
1h/2h cav aren't really any worse off than before. Normal 2h stab is harder to deal with in most cases, making complaints against polearm 2h mode silly from my perspective. The shorter length rearing is good at preventing mindless charges, but on the flip side, polearms can't just flail their stab everywhere and hope to rear. You need to plan ahead. Cav is still one of the easiest and most rewarding classes once you understand what to do, but it takes a few days to a week to learn. You're in control of your own risk/reward most of the time.

It's difficult to force glances on the lighter horses, however. I think the heavier horses benefited from it more than they should have in comparison to light horses.

This is all true however I have still had my horse reared by stabs that seem to do 0dmg(or very very little) and make a glancing sound. I'm not entirely sure that is fully fixed.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on March 14, 2014, 09:49:51 pm
I've been reared by glances as well, but I don't know if they were on shorter than 140 polearms or not (can't remember).  Maybe it only works on glances less than 140 length (i.e. glances on polearms over 140 length still rear)?
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: Sandersson Jankins on March 14, 2014, 10:54:29 pm
Somewhat good cav player reporting in to say I'm perfectly fine with halfswording rearing, as well as any short polearms.

Maybe that's because I'm a lancer?
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: JasonPastman on March 15, 2014, 12:37:12 am
Cav is still one of the easiest and most rewarding classes once you understand what to do, but it takes a few days to a week to learn. You're in control of your own risk/reward most of the time.

San what's your 15 str alt light cav's name that has given you that insight?
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: San on March 15, 2014, 01:17:40 am
Sanworrier.
I had a lot of experience learning how to stop and manipulate other horses during my time as a lancer cav + 1h on foot.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: Relit on March 15, 2014, 01:40:31 am
Just tossing this in here as a aside: I can still glance rear horses on occasion with my pike. Is it based on a damage thresh-hold? like am I doing so much damage even with a glance that it triggers the rearing?
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: PsychoTwins on March 15, 2014, 01:41:53 am
Just tossing this in here as a aside: I can still glance rear horses on occasion with my pike. Is it based on a damage thresh-hold? like am I doing so much damage even with a glance that it triggers the rearing?

I believe so. Same concept of how people get killed by glances. It still does damage.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: San on March 15, 2014, 01:47:29 am
^This. Under 30 armour, you could imagine how difficult it is to deal 0 damage, especially when the horse is typically moving towards the stab. I wasn't able to force glances reliably until +3 warhorse levels of armour, around 42-45+.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: JasonPastman on March 15, 2014, 02:01:16 am
San, when did you respec to 1h shield cav, personally imo you might wanna consider 1h/pole shield cav given the new wpf distribution. You were good at lance cav back b4 they nerfed it 4 or 5 times over.

Also san, your to strunk man, my K/D is only (Kills/Deaths:3987/3828, 1.0:1)

While I do agree that heavy cav is probably the easiest class in the game, based on my experiences, light cav w/15str is one of the harder classes to play in this game. Assuming that is what your playing san, your kd is quite impressive.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: imisshotmail on March 15, 2014, 03:46:43 am
While I do agree that heavy cav is probably the easiest class in the game, based on my experiences, light cav w/15str is one of the harder classes to play in this game. Assuming that is what your playing san, your kd is quite impressive.

He's playing Heavy Cav as far as I know but the point still stands. While that KDR would be somewhat hard to get as light cav, a 3:1 would be bare minimum you should be getting, and 4-5:1 if you are good at it and can melee too. Lets say you are an ok melee player and would go 2:1 on foot with a 15/21 build, if you add a destrier/courser or whatever to that build boom thats an extra 2 free kills per life average and a 4:1 kdr. Obviously thats simplifying the whole thing but that's pretty much the easiest way to explain why cavalry is so strong.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: San on March 15, 2014, 05:05:17 am
It was heavy cav, barded->padded->large warhorse, easier at each stage. Light cav would be much worse from what I imagine. I did half and half with green tunic over mail and green rus lamellar and it didn't really change much since I did better on foot with the lighter armour, but worse on horse. That was my first prolonged time with 1h cav outside of the odd strat battle back in 2013. The top cav probably have much better performance than I do.

What I was trying to get at is that with cav, you can choose your encounters and your chance of success most of the time. Encounters you can't easily control, such as cav v cav, can be practiced just like melee vs melee. Unfortunately, for me, that means 50/50 chance of losing on a full speed head on collision (fun), or "gay" them with maneuvering and stopping their horse for an easier win (boring). Not saying you'll be a juggernaut right after picking it up, but your choices have tangible (and usually immediate) results. This results in a pleasant learning curve as you get used to it.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: Grumbs on March 15, 2014, 10:17:48 am
I said it a few times but make the heavier horses cheaper but tweak the stats so they are more in line with lighter horses, just slightly heavier versions. This will also help to counter HA/HX

Something is probably OP when its expected to get 3:1+ KDR without much experience at it. The bump/hit mechanics can be tweaked as well, and maybe have a look at the swing duration/sweetspot

Ranged are out of control anyway, just sort out each class by itself based on difficulty/risk/reward rather than keeping something strong just to counter something else like cav vs ranged. Look at ranged individually to see why so many people opt to play it (hint - it is super versatile, melee is mostly player skill and 1/0 slot 1 handers are great weapons, countering melee hits is trivial, especially with 1 handers not getting weapon stunned, click on guys from a distance to kill with relatively easy fps mechanics etc)
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: Angantyr on March 15, 2014, 10:59:01 am
especially with 1 handers not getting weapon stunned
Yes, what is up with weapon stun as of late?

Previously using heavy weapons against light weapons and vice versa was really noticeable as it should be, weight class differences feel more artificial and superficial now. Toothpicks held in one hand duelling with long bardiches like it was some fantasy universe.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: JasonPastman on March 15, 2014, 04:47:22 pm
@San and imisshotmail, I agree to a certain extent, but you also have to take into consideration that 50% if not more of the maps on the NA1 rotation are city or village, often very closed in and are thus light cav unfriendly maps. This means that far less often your not in control of the encounter and thus subject to more vulnerabilities then advantages when engaged.  Furthermore, range particularly on these maps have the ability to set up at unreachable places or "dead ends" often devastating you before or as you are being swarmed by the other team.  Not so much of a problem for heavy cav as they generally can plow through mobs and take many projectiles (although maybe not with this new change).  Although, on open maps where you can pick your fight there the advantage is again with the cav and the kd does reflect this. 

When 1h went op I decided to go 2h heavy cav, 24/15, ((+3)(barbed horse, Serbian with knee caps, plate boots..etc)) and without trying at level 33 I was easily able to go 5/1 sometimes even 10/1 or 10/0 and would make money or if I would lose it would be very little do to banner stack and valor.  With my current build it is almost impossible to get those kind of numbers although my overall damage output is generally high my kd is often very low relative to my score (why i feel the lance needs a buff - it is silly, really, when I'm charging full speed and lance a un-helmed guy in the face and he doesn't die, or when my angle is not perfect or I'm not charging full speed and my lance just bounces of some plate guy (especially heavy cav)-).  Heavy cav do not have these problems (unless they use the lance -but then you just couch- as you just park or plow your tank up to or into some enemies and start slashing and the numbers really add up when your probably going to survive the whole round doing it.  For light cav this kind of behavior would mean instant death. Cav need to be thought of in the same way we think of strength and agility and ranged foot.  Light and heavy cav are two completely different classes, and it is silly, perhaps even border line ignorant to group all cav classes together.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: imisshotmail on March 15, 2014, 06:03:16 pm
Lance cav is still stronger that 1h/2h cavalry imo but anyway- Heavy Cavalry is ridiculously strong, but the fact that light cav are nowhere near as strong as heavy doesn't mean they aren't OP either. If every armoured horse got removed from the game, cav would still be the best class by some distance.

I do agree about the maps though but I don't see that as a balance problem, just as a Bad Map Rotation problem, with half the maps being horrible to play cavalry or melee without a shield because of the corridors that you have to run through with ranged on the other side getting free shots.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: SugarHoe on March 15, 2014, 11:59:19 pm
San what's your 15 str alt light cav's name that has given you that insight?
oh man get rekt Jason
Sanworrier.
I had a lot of experience learning how to stop and manipulate other horses during my time as a lancer cav + 1h on foot.

(click to show/hide)

Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: JasonPastman on March 16, 2014, 12:24:58 am
Lance cav is still stronger that 1h/2h cavalry imo but anyway- Heavy Cavalry is ridiculously strong, but the fact that light cav are nowhere near as strong as heavy doesn't mean they aren't OP either. If every armoured horse got removed from the game, cav would still be the best class by some distance.

No way, my HBS does way more damage then my lance, and 1h doesn't have the 23 or w/e % debuff that 2h does plus a force field like shield.  Tactically that statement may be true but I would probably have a higher kdr with 2h not using the lance.  Hell tbh the only reason I use it is because it's fun. 

As far as your op statement, if I may, I for a fact will dismount my opponent in a duel against any light cav, with my current build, while on foot, simply because I understand how to. People who rage that cav is op either simply don't know what to do against them (like a dear in head lights) or are just trolling.  There is a reason cav don't finish off their dismounted opponents, and i has little to do with honor more to do with the fact that light cav are weak and against an aware skilled opponent are at a huge disadvantage.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: Sandersson Jankins on March 16, 2014, 12:51:00 am
As far as your op statement, if I may, I for a fact will dismount my opponent in a duel against any light cav, with my current build, while on foot, simply because I understand how to. People who rage that cav is op either simply don't know what to do against them (like a dear in head lights) or are just trolling.

Cavalry, be it light or heavy, forces players to pay attention all the time or be punished heavily. A lot of people don't want to pay attention to the game all the time, so they come to really hate cavalry.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: imisshotmail on March 18, 2014, 12:49:35 am
No way, my HBS does way more damage then my lance, and 1h doesn't have the 23 or w/e % debuff that 2h does plus a force field like shield.  Tactically that statement may be true but I would probably have a higher kdr with 2h not using the lance.  Hell tbh the only reason I use it is because it's fun. 

As far as your op statement, if I may, I for a fact will dismount my opponent in a duel against any light cav, with my current build, while on foot, simply because I understand how to. People who rage that cav is op either simply don't know what to do against them (like a dear in head lights) or are just trolling.  There is a reason cav don't finish off their dismounted opponents, and i has little to do with honor more to do with the fact that light cav are weak and against an aware skilled opponent are at a huge disadvantage.


Any good cavalry players can beat the vast majority of melee players on foot even when they are aware (assuming Heavy Lance) but the thing is bad cav players don't need to kill aware people too, they just kill 2 people who are unaware a round, get dismounted and then play as a normal melee build.

I've played cavalry enough to know that the only times you should be getting dismounted are due to ranged, thats the only counter the class has if you play right, and it's barely a counter because you get dismounted and then what, you're a melee build with either 1 less ps or 1 less athletics. Hardly much of a disadvantage considering all the benefits you got from being on a horse until that point.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on March 18, 2014, 02:15:58 pm
@San and imisshotmail, I agree to a certain extent, but you also have to take into consideration that 50% if not more of the maps on the NA1 rotation are city or village, often very closed in and are thus light cav unfriendly maps. This means that far less often your not in control of the encounter and thus subject to more vulnerabilities then advantages when engaged.  Furthermore, range particularly on these maps have the ability to set up at unreachable places or "dead ends" often devastating you before or as you are being swarmed by the other team.  Not so much of a problem for heavy cav as they generally can plow through mobs and take many projectiles (although maybe not with this new change).



This this this.

I consider myself one of the better cavalry lancers in NA1 (or just one of the better cavalry players), at least it seems this way whenever I get a chance to play during prime time.  Lots of times I go 4, 5 or higher kills for every death on a map.  But my overall K:D is 2.2:1
(click to show/hide)


But then again, I don't do things to purposely pad my K:D, I've never cared about my overall K:D I play for the round and the map and my personal enjoyment.  I don't leave when my team is losing, I don't leave when the map plays 3 city/enclosed maps in a row, I don't leave if I'm having a bad night.  I think people's arguments that cavalry is automatically expected to be better than infantry, is false.  But it is true like San said, you can typically pick your engagements more than infantry, so you can weigh risk vs reward a little better (at least on faster horses, if you are on a slow horse you still can get picked on by other cav).  But lots of times like Jason says, you're playing a city map where you shouldn't even be riding around on a horse, so you really don't get to put that "choose your engagements" into affect.  There's a lot of enclosed maps in the battle rotation, I'd wager far more city/enclosed maps than maps that have some openness to them.

San says the "glance won't rear horses", only affects the heavier horses (so lighter horses still get reared on a glance), so I stand by my sentiment that it was too drastic of a change to allow anything with polearm animation that has pierce stab, to rear a horse. 

I think it would be a good idea to have lowered the length needed to rear from 140 to like 130 or 135 (I made a long post about this before, and showed the different length polearms in each category, not going to rehash it here).  But not every single polearm animation with pierce stab to rear a horse, that was one hell of a drastic change.  Especially here we find out that the trade off (no more rearing on glances) didn't even work for light horses (well it only works reliably on large warhorses and above...so even some of the lighter armored horses). 
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: a_bear_irl on March 18, 2014, 11:02:35 pm


I consider myself one of the better cavalry lancers in NA1 (or just one of the better cavalry players),

my overall K:D is 2.2:1


visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: imisshotmail on March 18, 2014, 11:39:14 pm
I consider myself one of the better cavalry lancers in NA1 (or just one of the better cavalry players), at least it seems this way whenever I get a chance to play during prime time.  Lots of times I go 4, 5 or higher kills for every death on a map.  But my overall K:D is 2.2:1

Personally I think you're an average cavalry player, and for me 2.2:1 kdr for an average player is more than it should be.. 1:1 should be the average no?
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: Sandersson Jankins on March 19, 2014, 12:28:27 am
(click to show/hide)
WE GOT DODGSON HERE

See? Nobody cares.

(click to show/hide)

Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: BlueKnight on March 19, 2014, 12:44:02 am
What about dmg multiplier instead of rearuping?
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: Rhaelys on March 19, 2014, 03:32:36 am

This this this.

I consider myself one of the better cavalry lancers in NA1 (or just one of the better cavalry players), at least it seems this way whenever I get a chance to play during prime time.  Lots of times I go 4, 5 or higher kills for every death on a map.  But my overall K:D is 2.2:1
(click to show/hide)


But then again, I don't do things to purposely pad my K:D, I've never cared about my overall K:D I play for the round and the map and my personal enjoyment.  I don't leave when my team is losing, I don't leave when the map plays 3 city/enclosed maps in a row, I don't leave if I'm having a bad night.  I think people's arguments that cavalry is automatically expected to be better than infantry, is false.  But it is true like San said, you can typically pick your engagements more than infantry, so you can weigh risk vs reward a little better (at least on faster horses, if you are on a slow horse you still can get picked on by other cav).  But lots of times like Jason says, you're playing a city map where you shouldn't even be riding around on a horse, so you really don't get to put that "choose your engagements" into affect.  There's a lot of enclosed maps in the battle rotation, I'd wager far more city/enclosed maps than maps that have some openness to them.

San says the "glance won't rear horses", only affects the heavier horses (so lighter horses still get reared on a glance), so I stand by my sentiment that it was too drastic of a change to allow anything with polearm animation that has pierce stab, to rear a horse. 

I think it would be a good idea to have lowered the length needed to rear from 140 to like 130 or 135 (I made a long post about this before, and showed the different length polearms in each category, not going to rehash it here).  But not every single polearm animation with pierce stab to rear a horse, that was one hell of a drastic change.  Especially here we find out that the trade off (no more rearing on glances) didn't even work for light horses (well it only works reliably on large warhorses and above...so even some of the lighter armored horses).

So where were you before when all polearms with a pierce thrust could rear before a Warband patch inexplicably made the minimum length to rear 141?

Also pocket pikes*

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: HarunYahya on March 19, 2014, 01:17:32 pm
My god,cavalry QQing about other cavalry...WHAT SHOULD WE,INFANTRY DO YOU X-TO-WIN-bundle of sticksS ? Grow some balls for fucks sake . Cav is easiest thing,if shit goes bad,ride back to your teammates.That simple.
Rearing de rearing yordunuz amk
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on March 19, 2014, 02:22:27 pm
Personally I think you're an average cavalry player, and for me 2.2:1 kdr for an average player is more than it should be.. 1:1 should be the average no?

If you say so, but whenever I play I'm always right up there as one of (or the) best cavalry on the server.
Title: Re: Rear length
Post by: Dionysus on March 19, 2014, 11:44:41 pm
A lot of comments from the players, but I have yet to see a single post from a horse.