Horses - how to improve difficulty

[bruce]

That is kinda what medieval cavalry did. They crushed into their enemies using momentum and weight. Decreasing HP and armor will only increase the lame thing that cav is in this mod. A backstabbing class. I think cavalry should be changed in something that can effectively attack an aware enemy, but only those with short weapons. I really don't know why anyone would want cav to rely completely on backstabbing, also ranged would rape horses if they get any less durable.

Yes... but the thing is, the extra HP cavalry has right now is used for more forgiving backstabbing, where you can drive around for longer even if you screw up. It should at the very least have less HP versus all types of spears and pikes; running into pikes with an unarmoured horse and turning away isn't good balance by any means.

As for ranged, onehitting would not be fun, but current balance is also skewered, too, heirloomed horses take too much to shoot down. 4-6 arrows for a horse which can get out of range very quickly is far too forgiving. (Heirloomed) Destriers are almost like tanks vs ranged, while still having decent speed.

The only way a cavalry charge is going to make sense to do is if it is more or less devastating if done vs infantry without pikes/spears, but doing that without making them super-backstabbing machines used to kill some lone infantry is the problem*. Maybe horse corpses actually "knocking down" infantry with knockdown and some damage would make a cavalry charge work vs short weapons, since your impulse would be to "get away from the horse" rather then "stab horse in forehead with my sword".

*Where low maneuver would actually help.

[LordBerenger]

And even more removing fun from this mod....sigh, can't you just play at fuckin melee only servers? Jeeez

[Lamk]

As for ranged, onehitting would not be fun, but current balance is also skewered, too, heirloomed horses take too much to shoot down. 4-6 arrows for a horse which can get out of range very quickly is far too forgiving. (Heirloomed) Destriers are almost like tanks vs ranged, while still having decent speed.

I have a champion courser and strength archers take 2 arrows to kill it and I'm still 100 feet from them

[Joker86]

1) Maneuver

Contrary to popular belief among players which aren't very used to cav, decreasing maneuver cannot make cav more skillbased, only less. Skill is what you make of your freedom, if you don't have freedom, your skill doesn't matter. If anything, maneuver needs to be increased a lot on all horses.

Funny, I would lower the maneuverability of horses two to three points each, with no horse having more than 40. Currently the Arab Warhorse is plainly ridiculous.

Horses are not supposed to be some kind of super mobile hover platform to wiggle over the battlefield like a dragonfly. 

And I also agree about your freedom = skill equation. I could easily counter that things get more difficult with limitations. To master them in the same extend like before you require skill.

[CrazyCracka420]

Sorry I'm late to the party, only read first two pages so far...going to try to keep reading through the day...Full disclosure: I'm a 10th gen cav lancer

Hobb hit the nail on the head for me, just make it so that your view "bobs" up and down with the horse.  At least it may be worth trying (it may be impossible to swing with the screen bobbing, but at least it would be more realistic and also more challenging).  As it stands, horse lancing and crossbowery is very easy from horse back because you don't actually have the effect of riding a horse on your view.  Maybe start with a very tiny "bob" effect, like Lemmy said, you're not going to completely bob up and down, you'd brace yourself to try and minimize the effect.

Stamina would be a good addition in game (start with horses like red dead redemption, hopefully bring it to characters as well in the future so you get tired if you keep spamming a great maul). 

Also deployable siege defense equipment like stakes for archers would be amazing (doesn't necessarily have to damage horses as that may be hard to code, but just making it so horses can't go to certain areas would be good).

joey bologna - allow horses to pick up an extra person at considerable hit to speed/maneuver

That would be amazing...I've mentioned that before too.

Another thing some people have mentioned that I really like is realistic, if horses take damage sometimes they become uncontrollable (and/or buck the rider).  A horse getting shot with arrows and then being uncontrollable for 2-5 seconds would be pretty realistic. 

I'm just brainstorming here, not necessarily looking to implement all these ideas, maybe just some.

[Torben]

Sorry I'm late to the party, only read first two pages so far...

Hobb hit the nail on the head for me, just make it so that your view "bobs" up and down with the horse.  At least it may be worth trying (it may be impossible to swing with the screen bobbing, but at least it would be more realistic and also more challenging).  As it stands, horse lancing and crossbowery is very easy from horse back because you don't actually have the effect of riding a horse on your view.

weird, my horse never bobs around if I ride a horse.  doesnt when I run on foot either.  I knew I am special ^^

[Tydeus]

Shik explained the current speed of horses and how it relates to horse speeds irl. The tldr is that they're too fast. Gallop wasn't really used in combat as it was too hard to control while fighting. Maybe implement something like this? Once you start going a certain percent of the horses max speed lancing/swinging your weapon becomes cumbersome. Randomize the mouse speed, make the lance thrust be off center and side swings slower/less damage, etc.

[CrazyCracka420]

For the record, a lot of people have been QQ"ing about cavalry lately, but they aren't overpowered (nothing in the game is).  A team with decent tactics, teamwork and the right equipment makes cavalry useless.  The only reason you see people QQ'ing about horses is because the balance system blows ass in this game, and because a lot of infantry not only want to, but fully expect to be able to run around and be "rambo" and then qq when paper beats rock.

I still propose cavalry only "appears" OP to some people, because infantry doesn't work together.  One person running by themselves SHOULD be easy prey for a cavalry lancer. 

The best way to counter the cavalry QQ'ers, is to force mandatory "practice" or drills, like they do in Mount and Musket.  Get a dev or admin on each team and tell everyone to stfu and listen.  Make them run in loose formations with pikemen on the sides and rears, shields in the front.

Until infantry gets a fucking clue, you will continue to have people whine about cavalry.

[LordBerenger]

I hate these gay infantry only ''master race'' kids.

[Leesin]

I hate these gay infantry only ''master race'' kids.

Most of the anti-cav QQers are the guys that sprint from spawn directly towards enemy, looking in no other direction than straight ahead of them, then spam the chat with whine when they get lanced in the back because they weren't paying attention to what was coming up behind them, any decent player should know to look out behind and to the sides for lancers, especially at the start of a round.

[Micah]

So we were discussing horses yesterday, and were trying to come up with ideas how to change horses in general. Note - this is in no way a balance thread, so if you think horses are OP or UP, and feel you have to communicate this, please, gtfo.

For everyone else - what changes could be done to increase the player skill needed to ride a horse? Right now, it's W to accelerate, S to decelerate. Therefore, it's more like a motorbike than a horse. Maybe someone who has done real riding has some insight how we could translate rider skill into a game mechanic? Riding should be difficulty in itself, just as flying a plane in a game would be. Riding needs more nuances.

Anyone got some ideas.

So we were discussing archery yesterday, and were trying to come up with ideas how to change archers in general. Note - this is in no way a balance thread, so if you think archers are OP or UP, and feel you have to communicate this, please, gtfo.

For everyone else - what changes could be done to increase the player skill needed to shoot a bow? Right now, it's W to runaway , LMB to shoot an arrow. Therefore, it's more like a gun than a bow. Maybe someone who has done real bowshooting has some insight how we could translate archery skill into a game mechanic? Archery should be difficulty in itself, just as <???> in a game would be. Archery needs more nuances.

So we were discussing shielders yesterday, and were trying to come up with ideas how to change shielders in general. Note - this is in no way a balance thread, so if you think shielders are OP or UP, and feel you have to communicate this, please, gtfo.

For everyone else - what changes could be done to increase the player skill needed to play a shielder? Right now, it's LMB to swing a sword, RMB to rise a shield. Therefore, it's more like a <monkey drilled to press 2 buttons> than a real <warrior fighing in an epic battle>. Maybe someone who has done real swordfighting has some insight how we could translate swordman skill into a game mechanic? swordfight should be difficulty in itself, just as <doing hardcore sports> in a game would be. fighting needs more nuances.

Anyone got some ideas.

i am really  SORRY, and i dont wanna get over my head , i dont want to whore for fame and the last thing i want is to make the creator of tis awesome game pissed ,but i feel like i need to state a controverse opinion . i love that awesome game which chadz and all the other cool devs  created for us/me, still working hard on it and generously  give it to us FOR FREE just so we can have most awesome fun anyone can imagine while wasting our lifetime 
yet this OP makes no sense at all to me .
it is not possible to come up with a new,"skillfull" way of puting riding in a wargame without thinking about ballancing it into the game and thus this idea would not belong here because the OP forbids ballance discussioins. Besides this community is (and has to be) biased with cRPG  gameplay experiances .Thus this this thread turned into a mess of a mix of QQ,nerf cries,ballance issues, and some really ambitious and great ideas about game ballance related cav changes .. no single post fits for  the OP because it cant.
thinking about the reason for this OP makes me wonder is it either :
- an awesome troll - in this case i must admit you got me there really good and its one of the most awesome trolls i ever seen
- a call to the community to help them increase their own game experiance addressing cavalry issues - in this case i feel the greatest respect and happieness BUT the OP would be somewhat contradictous and should be rephrased somehow

each class in this game requires enough skill (game mechanics wise ) and is fun to play   

(click to show/hide)

For the record, a lot of people have been QQ"ing about cavalry lately, but they aren't overpowered (nothing in the game is).  A team with decent tactics, teamwork and the right equipment makes cavalry useless.  The only reason you see people QQ'ing about horses is because the balance system blows ass in this game, and because a lot of infantry not only want to, but fully expect to be able to run around and be "rambo" and then qq when paper beats rock.

I still propose cavalry only "appears" OP to some people, because infantry doesn't work together.  One person running by themselves SHOULD be easy prey for a cavalry lancer. 

The best way to counter the cavalry QQ'ers, is to force mandatory "practice" or drills, like they do in Mount and Musket.  Get a dev or admin on each team and tell everyone to stfu and listen.  Make them run in loose formations with pikemen on the sides and rears, shields in the front.

Until infantry gets a fucking clue, you will continue to have people whine about cavalry.

^this


the only problem i see with cav is that it acts on a different level of gameplay which i call macro (tactical) layer where all infantry is acting on the micro(fighting)  layer (how i call it) and can only be harmonized into the game by changing the meta(teamplay) layer
but that is of no matter here

edit: and : yes, i did read eah single post in this thread 

[Frell]

You don't think its weird that shielders and 2h/p have to worry about timing and countering while cav can just play the game like grand theft auto?

[Micah]

You don't think its weird that shielders and 2h/p have to worry about timing and countering while cav can just play the game like grand theft auto?

let me help you pick which category of posts your one is ok

Thus this this thread turned into a mess of a mix of QQ,nerf cries,ballance issues, and some really ambitious and great ideas about cav changes .. no single post fits for  the OP because it cant.

[Frell]

Brilliant. The standard "my class if fine, everyone who thinks its OP is a QQer and anyone who thinks its UP is my friend!" I never commented at all on the damage of cav. Nothing about cav is overpowered but the role is still easy to play compared to everything else, and chadz wants that to change.


And I already contributed to a non-nerfing suggestion. Look on the first page.

[polkafranzi]

For everyone else - what changes could be done to increase the player skill needed to play a shielder? Right now, it's just LEFT DIRECTION and press LMB 100 times a second to swing a sword, RMB to rise a shield. Therefore, it's more like a <monkey drilled to press 2 buttons> than a real <warrior fighing in an epic battle>. Maybe someone who has done real swordfighting has some insight how we could translate swordman skill into a game mechanic? swordfight should be difficulty in itself, just as <doing hardcore sports> in a game would be. fighting needs more nuances.

^ fixed

Also, if i'm not mistaken, Frell plays archer? So ignore any post he makes on whole forum.