Suggestion: Polearms glance when enemies are close.

[Fluid]

As it is right now, melee weapons are kind of skill*numbers*quality in how they fight other melee weapons, with the exception of pikes/longspears. The most effective at hitting without being harmed are currently ranged and horse/ranged, as one of them can use ladders to get to roofs and the other is just impossible to catch without skilled ranged players and other horsemen.

[Thomek]

I'm glad the notion catches on!

Of course, the idea in an extended sense covers changes to gameplay all over the board, and a complete rebalancing of everything. Considering it took almost 2 years to get where we are now (good balance), starting again doesn't seem very attractive.

Just know that I'm not out to "Nerf" one single class or anything like that.. I'm out to change the way we balance classes.

In order to do that, we need a clear vision of how we want the game to be. It could become a total fail, who knows. That's why it's good we have clever skepticists like Paul around. But we also need visionaries and ideas to push things forward.

Now.. Without me knowing very much about the situation with coders, balancing team etc. I have not the slightest idea if the resources to go through with "A New Vision For cRPG" if at all viable.

If any dev, or hopefully chadz himself could give us an idea about this, negative or thumbs up, it would give us forum-thinkers some idea of what to think about next.

cheers!

[[ptx]]

Also, make those same polearms have a chance of crushthrough against lighter weapons, such as Katanas, then.

[Thomek]

Why not PTX

[Casimir]

Big 2h should be able to crush through light weapons aswell then.

[Dezilagel]

I dont use a lance ;) I'm jav cav.

essentially what I mean is 2h's are duelists, close combat specialists and they fight very well vs other infantry but  by pulling off a ridiculous animation its too easy for them to take the polearmers niche of anti cav as well.  There are more examples, 1h/ shield should be destroyed by crush through, but the slow crush through should get countered by a decent ranged 2h / polearmer. All i think is that too many classes are made redundant by the over flexible existing classes.

This game would be a lot more balanced if people felt there was more niches for classes that are currently unplayed. 2h is just an example of one class where they can fight their would be counters as well as their prey classes (ye i couldnt think of another word).

On the subject of the lolstab, I have always been against it as it basically fills the role of a polearm stab, using a lolstab you can outrange horsemen head on, you can assist in a stabbing motion in melee fights (like a stronger spear) and it gives 2h excessive range that completely nullifies many polearmers advantage. I dont know how to balance this, but if they made 2h's lolstab shorter or less damaging but their cut damage higher I would reckon it might restore 2h to its rightful place as a heavy hitter duelist weapon.

You still haven't explained why.

Give me one class that is "underplayed". Pure thrower maybe, but then throwing weapons were never intended to be used as a primary, although they work great as backup weapons.

And yet there are people who make good use of pure thrower builds too.

And I can't believe you don't see the incredible fallacy of your argument when you state that classes are made "redundant" and that that sucks when what you are suggesting will make all classes redundant in the wrong situation.

I'm saying that for example if I get ambushed by three people I will obviously be at a disadvantage. But if I play really good (and/or they play really bad) I can fight my way out of it. What you want is for me to just die? Bullshit I say.

What your change will basically do is make cav OP as they are the class that best offensively can pick their fights. 2h (who SHOULD have their lolstab in my opinion since it's part of what makes them good and interesting in duels and it gives them a way to fight cav. Poles have horsestop while 2h excel at sniping the rider. Seems fair to me.) would be forced to constantly cower behind their pikeman/shielder teammates leading to stale and boring gameplay.

I go on the duel server and see people duelling with everything from katanas to bar maces and scimitars. Isn't that awesome? That you can develop your own unique fighting style and be successful?

Would you rather have it so that if you want to duel you must use a bastard sword because everything else is your supposed counter?


"Hi there Mr Oldmy old friend! I'm Le New Player and I just got hold of this awesome looking Great Sword. Can you teach me how to use it?"

"Sure thing son, first you need to... Hold on, a cav player is headed for your position!"

"Oh, how exciting! What do I do, how can I beat this guy?"

"You just lie down and die, Greatswords are not for fighting cav!"

"What? So I can't beat him? I'm sorry Mr Oldmy old friend, but that's fucking retarded."

"Well son, some people sucked at this game so much they whined on the forums and made c-rpg into a game of counters. Now go and find some pikemen to duel, I'm off to p0wn everyone because I play HA, cya!"


All of you lobbying for this change use the word "should" extensively, but fail to back it up with anything solid.

[Joker86]

I'm saying that for example if I get ambushed by three people I will obviously be at a disadvantage. But if I play really good (and/or they play really bad) I can fight my way out of it. What you want is for me to just die? Bullshit I say.

I don't say there should not be the possibility to fight your way out, but if you died you definitely deserved it, because you allowed yourself to get ambushed by 3 enemies. This is an important part of the game, I think, watching at the "whole thing" and not just yourself. It's definitely underepresented in the game, besides of the (incredibly annoying, as unlimitedly repeatable) voice commands there is not a single feature implemented that encourages teamplay.

I know some people like the idea to be someone really special, but I personally prefer the idea of everyone being only a cog in the whole machine. You still can show your value and be a special, very important cog, but still your are not a complete machine yourself.

For me personally the ideal balance is somewhere in the middle between skill and rock-paper-siccors.

The current state of the game is quite good, but increasing the teamplay aspect would need us to completely discard all changes made and start over from scratch.

Perhaps there could be some alternative cRPG server with an own database, and everyone who is willing to participate and give feedback is allowed to join? I don't think there will be many people who just want to play there and don't care for the rest, as the database will be reset or completely reworked that often, it's pointless to try to develop a real character. But I also fear the developing team does not have any ressources left for actually "doubling" their work. 

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

The thing we need is not to make it a total rock-paper-siccors, infact their should only be a really small amount of that, as it is only a matter of time before someone makes a unique build which would end up working as a rock against siccors, a siccor against papers, and a paper against rocks... what we need is to have (a small amount of this, and yes a lancer cav should have a challenge fighting a GOOD melee two-hander with a greatsword, but the GOOD melee two-hander with a danish greatsword should have a HARDER time against the lancer, as it is now a greatsword kills a cav head on, instead the greatsworder would have to dodge/block his attack and manage to get to the side of the cav instead of just beating him head on, this should however, not be the case with the pikes...

What we need is there to be a greater difference in how each "class" functions, this difference would add some nice variation and not make every fight feel more or less the same.

[Lorenzo_of_Iberia]

You still haven't explained why.

Give me one class that is "underplayed". Pure thrower maybe, but then throwing weapons were never intended to be used as a primary, although they work great as backup weapons.

And yet there are people who make good use of pure thrower builds too.

And I can't believe you don't see the incredible fallacy of your argument when you state that classes are made "redundant" and that that sucks when what you are suggesting will make all classes redundant in the wrong situation.

I'm saying that for example if I get ambushed by three people I will obviously be at a disadvantage. But if I play really good (and/or they play really bad) I can fight my way out of it. What you want is for me to just die? Bullshit I say.

What your change will basically do is make cav OP as they are the class that best offensively can pick their fights. 2h (who SHOULD have their lolstab in my opinion since it's part of what makes them good and interesting in duels and it gives them a way to fight cav. Poles have horsestop while 2h excel at sniping the rider. Seems fair to me.) would be forced to constantly cower behind their pikeman/shielder teammates leading to stale and boring gameplay.

I go on the duel server and see people duelling with everything from katanas to bar maces and scimitars. Isn't that awesome? That you can develop your own unique fighting style and be successful?

Would you rather have it so that if you want to duel you must use a bastard sword because everything else is your supposed counter?


"Hi there Mr Oldmy old friend! I'm Le New Player and I just got hold of this awesome looking Great Sword. Can you teach me how to use it?"

"Sure thing son, first you need to... Hold on, a cav player is headed for your position!"

"Oh, how exciting! What do I do, how can I beat this guy?"

"You just lie down and die, Greatswords are not for fighting cav!"

"What? So I can't beat him? I'm sorry Mr Oldmy old friend, but that's fucking retarded."

"Well son, some people sucked at this game so much they whined on the forums and made c-rpg into a game of counters. Now go and find some pikemen to duel, I'm off to p0wn everyone because I play HA, cya!"


All of you lobbying for this change use the word "should" extensively, but fail to back it up with anything solid.

Yawn same 15 year old rubbish I can expect

I am not suggesting a total rock paper scissors overhaul, this is what you interpret from what I have said. I am not lobbying for cav, if anything I am lobbying for polearms that just dont get used. There is really no point in using anti cav spears when you can play as a 2h and be capable of dehorsing the majority of light cav.

You're looking for a class that is under played :

Pikeman, since the nerf
Hoplites have always been underused, there are many alts but they are still rare in battle
Infantry that also can throw a bit (a class I think needs to be buffed)

I am suggesting that these classes become more viable by the other classes being less effective vs well everything. I want to see this for balance, something you never have understood and i'll clue you in buddy the promoted use of classes mentions actually would put cavalry at a disadvantage. It's all the cocky rambo players like yourself that make life so easy for cav, you run off and go get your kills and when you come back half of your team are dead cause all the 2h's and aggressive polearmers ran off to do their own thing.

As for the 3 on 1 scenario, you havnt read properly because I'm pretty sure I mention that 'if the peasants are clever', at no point do I say auto win, just that it should be a lot harder than it is now to get out of said situation alive.

Finally your little scenario with 'le new player' (as you so wonderfully put it) doesnt quite work, he shouldnt lie down, he should move out of the way ... Thats quite an obvious suggestion.

So to conclude :

- leaning to more rock/ paper / scissors scenario in fact promotes class diversity and teamwork (cavalry will be at a disadvantage)
- 3 on 1 should not be auto win, but neither should you be able to spam your way out of it
- new players should not come to you for advice cause said advice will send them to their graves

I hope this clears things up ;) I know you want a world where everyone fights with 2h's, but I really really really really dont, mostly cause it will just benefit cav as most 2h's have got huge ego's but not much to talk about in brains Cavalry prey on the stupid, cocky and the heroic, 2h's can be considered all of these things.

[Wraist]

I am not suggesting a total rock paper scissors overhaul, this is what you interpret from what I have said. I am not lobbying for cav, if anything I am lobbying for polearms that just dont get used. There is really no point in using anti cav spears when you can play as a 2h and be capable of dehorsing the majority of light cav.

The last sentence implies that you're lobbying for cav.

You're looking for a class that is under played :

Pikeman, since the nerf
Hoplites have always been underused, there are many alts but they are still rare in battle
Infantry that also can throw a bit (a class I think needs to be buffed)

I am suggesting that these classes become more viable by the other classes being less effective vs well everything.

Why do they need to become more viable?

I want to see this for balance, something you never have understood and i'll clue you in buddy the promoted use of classes mentions actually would put cavalry at a disadvantage. It's all the cocky rambo players like yourself that make life so easy for cav, you run off and go get your kills and when you come back half of your team are dead cause all the 2h's and aggressive polearmers ran off to do their own thing.

Irrelevant for the most part, but anyway it was never stated how the system would put cav at a disadvantage.

As for the 3 on 1 scenario, you havnt read properly because I'm pretty sure I mention that 'if the peasants are clever', at no point do I say auto win, just that it should be a lot harder than it is now to get out of said situation alive.

But what if he were rock and all three of them were scissors?

I hope this clears things up ;) I know you want a world where everyone fights with 2h's, but I really really really really dont, mostly cause it will just benefit cav as most 2h's have got huge ego's but not much to talk about in brains Cavalry prey on the stupid, cocky and the heroic, 2h's can be considered all of these things.

So to recap, there's no reason to use spears because 2hers can dehorse cav, but most 2hers are easy prey for cav, so nerf 2hers ability to deal with cav so the ones that are easy prey start bringing spears in which case the ones that weren't easy prey now become easy[ier] prey? Your other conclusions also have issues with them.

Anyway, the most important question is, why is flexibility bad?

[Gurnisson]

There is really no point in using anti cav spears when you can play as a 2h and be capable of dehorsing the majority of light cav.

It's rare that you one-hit the horse with a two-hander, and if you don't do that you'll be one-hit yourself, by the lancer's lance. Polearms are much better for taking down horse because you can keep them out of their stabbing range by rearing the horse.

[Joker86]

Why do they need to become more viable?

For the sake of diversity and to stop punishing players who like the idea of playing these classes (Yes, there are players who don't go for the currently OP build every time)...

Anyway, the most important question is, why is flexibility bad?

Flexibility means that people will always go for the most flexible and even most slitghtly OP class, destroying class balance on server. This is what we witnessed with archers. It also destryos teamplay, as someone totally flexible doesn't have to rely on anybody else. That's why you never see horse archers grouping up.

Some people want more teamplay and less e-peen-solo-fragging on the servers.

The question is only, what the developers want.

[Teeth]

It's rare that you one-hit the horse with a two-hander, and if you don't do that you'll be one-hit yourself, by the lancer's lance. Polearms are much better for taking down horse because you can keep them out of their stabbing range by rearing the horse.

This, facing lancers head on is a bit of a gamble with a 2h. If the horse doesn't die you're toast. And even the arabian has survived getting stabbed in the face by a 28p stab in full motion. You can't hit the rider before the heavy lance hits you, if timed right you can just hit the horse. Any head on charge from a horseman now while I use my ashwood pike means a dead horse and mostly a dead rider. I can get 3 hits in the horse before it can move away, almost always killing it.

[Lorenzo_of_Iberia]

It's rare that you one-hit the horse with a two-hander, and if you don't do that you'll be one-hit yourself, by the lancer's lance. Polearms are much better for taking down horse because you can keep them out of their stabbing range by rearing the horse.

agreed, but if you are going to charge into a fray on a horse I can tell you it will take at least a few arrows and even if it survives 1 hit from a lolstab it wont last another (if its destrier or below). I prefer polearms for taking down horses but their usefulness at delivering powerful blows deters many users from using an anti-cav polearm i.e. spears etc, other polearms that do great damage tend to lack in range, attack directions or ability to use with a shield.

The last sentence implies that you're lobbying for cav.

Yet I also suggest a system where pikes and anti cav weapons become more viable, implying a replacement of 2h's ability to attack cav head on with actual classes designed for anti cav. If I really need to explain to you how that disadvantages cav...

Why do they need to become more viable?

Variation is always good, these are classes that would not only add dynamics to teams but also are viable against the classes people whine about (archers, cav, etc). Also more classes means more qualities that can be offered to a team.

Irrelevant for the most part, but anyway it was never stated how the system would put cav at a disadvantage.

You dont see how pikemen, thrower hybrids and hoplites becoming more viable would put cav at a disadvantage? Either you  believe 2h's are worthy anti-cav (supporting my point) or you should look into the weapons these classes use and rethink your question

But what if he were rock and all three of them were scissors?

can 3 pikemen beat a 2h? yes if they arnt idiots
can 3 1h's beat a polearmer? yes again

etc etc etc

So to recap, there's no reason to use spears because 2hers can dehorse cav, but most 2hers are easy prey for cav, so nerf 2hers ability to deal with cav so the ones that are easy prey start bringing spears in which case the ones that weren't easy prey now become easy[ier] prey? Your other conclusions also have issues with them.

I'll rephrase it for you, most 2h's put themselves in awful positions through lack of judgement, yet they still can easily stand there and get away with it. Many 2h's dont manage this but a decent amount do. This influences others to go rambo and be easy prey for cav. I suggest we make 2h's less able to go stand in open field by themselves and encourage further ramboing (this ramboing is awful for team play), make 2h's rely on their team more, by giving other classes more of a role on the battlefield.

Ideally I wanna see 2h's used as shock troops sent into the middle of the fray that rely on the rest of their team to allow them to do what they excel at (being brilliant anti infantry) while not being flanked. Current situation we have is a lot of random players running around trying to be heroes and not protecting the few people brave enough to play a support class.

Anyway, the most important question is, why is flexibility bad?

Flexibility is bad for teamplay, your reliance on allies drops and your ability to run around on your own becomes more viable. Teamplay is something I want to see more of in c-RPG and I am not the only one. Make classes more reliant on each other you get teamplay, make them too flexible you get a brawl.

The first half of your counter arguments are not realising the obvious and your second half reflect a mentality that I believe is detrimental to teamplay, but heh its your opinion all I can do is try to spell my points out for you

[Glyph]

i can only see this resulting in every poler twisting and turning to land the hit at the right striking range, which is not very nice/realistic. you could also just jump and aim low to avoid this damage reduction, so i don't think it'd work.