What has cRPG come to?

[Joker86]

For that I only got one comment.  Perhaps not the greatest idea, but at least I tried.

The idea is not that bad, actually, but I would rather concentrate on XP income than on gold gain. Because if you concentrate on latter, you directly affect the effectivity of a class by lowering its upkeep, which is equal to a nerf.

I made this post, long long time ago. It got ignored completely as well. I guess people fear maths. (Although there is nothing more complicated involced than the rule of three/percentages (which are also some kind of rule of three))

Oh, btw:

I read the entire thread and I think I was the only one who suggested anything other than a nerf.

(click to show/hide)

Me neither. We had enough nerfs.

How about this:

- Every spearman/pikeman/hoplite player gives every other infantry player around him +1 on ATH
- Every shieldman player gives every other infantry player around him +1 IF
- Every 2handed/halberd player gives every other infantry player around him +1 PS

(or any other combination, it's just an example)

You can never receive the bonus of your own class, which means if you are a 2hander and there are other 2handers around you, you still don't get a PS bonus.

Hopefully this will motivate infantry players to stick with other classes, creating a deadly cluster of doom.

[Joker86]

This game is not all about melee.
I played melee builds for few gens till now and I haven't notice any problems with cav or ranged. The fact that there're many of them doesn't mean they are OP.
Everybody's saying any playstyle except his playstyle is gay, that sounds so retarded.

I never said they were OP, nor did I say another playstayle was gay.

Basically, the problem is the following: the more archers and/or the more cavalry there is on the battlefield, the more difficult it becomes for infantry. It's an old strategy game rule that ranged units increase their power exponentially, when their number grows linearly. And although cav is melee, it works similarly, because the more cav there is, the more difficult it is to stay aware. (Cav has problems if there is too much other cav, but infantry doesn't feel this really, they just die)

If anything, I say both archers and especially (heavy!) cav are underpowered. But only on the paper. Their sheer amount and the behaviour of most infantry players makes them OP again. You know, it's the Piranha thing. A single Piranha is harmless to a full grown man. But a swarm?

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

I weep with shame every time an arrow hits my shield.  Unless of course, I'm protecting the 2-handers behind me in an advance.  Ha ha, JK!  I've never had a 2-hander stay behind me in an advance

Every time you try the shielder will suddenly decide to just intentionally leave you to get shot, just sayin'.

[Miwiw]

Suggesting to change the equipment can never be an argument. If we follow your philosophy, all infantry should exclusively be hoplites (shield vs. ranged, spear vs. cav), and if they are not, it's their fault they suck.

Wait. Telling infantry to take a shield is not okay, but several threads about Archers who only have a 0slot weapon with them are okay? Is it okay to tell Archers to fight in melee, and not kite, while it is not okay to tell infantry to get a shield against ranged, and a spear against cav? Tell the cav not to couche lance, but dont tell the infantry to get a spear. Tell the archers to go into melee whenever an infantry wants them to, but dont tell infantry to defend themselves by taking a shield? If you are getting shot, you use a shield. be clever, think yourself.
Anyone who doesn't help himself, is simply not in the position to complain. That's stupid.
There are only a few infantry players who actually use a shield (talking mainly about 2h here), example is rufio. He put 3 (?) points into shield. It is okay if he complains about Archers. But someone who doesn't use a shield, shouldn't do that.

And this stupid claim that warband is mostly about melee (or that crpg is mostly about melee), is also stupid and not true. It doesn't even matter that the new forum url is "meleegaming". That doesnt change shit.

[Bryggan]

The idea is not that bad, actually, but I would rather concentrate on XP income than on gold gain. Because if you concentrate on latter, you directly affect the effectivity of a class by lowering its upkeep, which is equal to a nerf.

I made this post, long long time ago. It got ignored completely as well. I guess people fear maths. (Although there is nothing more complicated involced than the rule of three/percentages (which are also some kind of rule of three))

Oh, btw:

(click to show/hide)

Oops, yeah I remember that now:oops:.  But by the time I got finished reading all the posts it was a distant, hazy memory.  I like that idea as it promotes teamplay, but would the usual rambos take advantage of it?  There are  already a lot of benefits of working as a team, such as staying alive and winning rounds and getting multiplyers, but a lot of people don't think the rewards are worth the thrill of charging shieldless into a volley of arrows or the excitement of dodging three lancer cav all by yourself.

But I think we need a way to give people a reason to use other classes than their favourites.  I wanted to be cav when I first started, but found out it wasn't quite as easy as it was in single player, and there were more than enough already, so I accepted the fact that I couldn't be the knight in shining armour who saves the day.  So I went thrower/shielder, a build I would never have considered at first, because I found it was the most useful to the team as anti-cav, anti-range, and still helpful in melee.

So, much like businesses, if you don't have enough people with certain skills, you raise the wages.  I'm not sure XP is the way to go, as archer types wouldn't really care too much about their hoplite char, but they might like the money made playing hoplite half the time to pay for their upkeep on their MW everything when they get to play their archer chars.

Every time you try the shielder will suddenly decide to just intentionally leave you to get shot, just sayin'.

Yeah, I'm sure that happens.  Kind of like when you draw out a couple tin can 2-handers out into your archer's killing field just to find they got bored and left.  But some of us actually do try help the 2-handers.  I sure as hell want them there when we close in with melee, being hybrid and all.

[Shub]

couched lance atack   - should be blockable with chance to go thro block.

Blockable but if blocked u get knocked down to ground.  PROBLEM SOLVED THX


-shub

[Macropus]

I never said they were OP, nor did I say another playstayle was gay.

Sorry for misunderstanding, guess only my first sentence was adressed to you)
Other part is more about the whole situation with this things...

Ye also may be i don't feel any problem with these classes just because im noob, but I really think everything is ok. Any class has it's advantages and disadvantages, and we should use our advantages and avoid some situations where we're experiencing our disadvantages. You just can't be effective everywhere and versus anyone. Sounds kinda obvious but some 2h guys still think that fighting in front like is their job, then they whine about getting shot by archers or something. 
And about the number of cavs and archers - i don't play cRPG long time enough to say for sure, but I think it will be autobalanced after all. I mean, more archers -> more shielders, more cavs - more polearmers, more archers and cavs -> more hoplites.
PS: aaand it seems that hoplites are the end of evolution chain 

[justme]

the way i see it is adding new type of arrows that have bonus vs horse (like bodkins have against armors). that way ranged would shoot at cav more often, and cav would want to revenge to them.. this is how infantry would have more room to play the game.. as for damage, i say 1.5 bonus
seems perfectly balnced to me

[CrazyCracka420]

You don't need to bring a shield to counter archers, you can stay behind your team's shielders.  You don't need to bring a spear to counter cav, you can stick with your own ranged or spearmen. 

It's not that you have to change your class or equipment to not get shot to shit, you just need to not be retarded and alter your play style.

I read crazyi bitching about getting killed to archers every round before reaching the enemy infantry.  Are you running ahead of your own team's infantry?  Have you tried to advance behind a shielder? 

You're bitching about getting shot by archers, sounds like you're doing something wrong, and not just once or twice, but every round.  I have to assume you're the 2h hero who runs ahead of his spearmen and shielders and then whines when someone takes advantage of your weaknesses.

I don't know how many times I have to repeat this, but I will continue:  Every class has strengths and weaknesses.  If your weakness is being exploited, you need to change something up (your tactics, your equipment, what group of people you're working with on your team, etc).  You can't cry about something if you're constantly having your weakness get exposed by another classes strengths, and you keep putting yourself in that situation.  Crying on the forums until the dev's cave in and nerf something is not a valid solution.

The classes are balanced, the problem is people refuse to change their playstyle to adapt to the current battlefield conditions.  Buff tactics, teamwork and awareness, don't nerf something because people refuse to change their rambo/hero mentality. 

[rAve]

what i do as cav is bump down a bunch of our shielders, then the archers just aim at them cuz they can shoot them while they're down, so i go on unhurt, works like a charm every time

[CrazyCracka420]

This may surprise some people, but all the same things that are getting you killed in game, are the same things that middle age armies had to counter and deal with.  When archers started getting the best of infantry, battle field commanders came up with the bright idea to use shield formations.  When cavalry started getting the best of ground troops, battlefield commanders came up with the bright idea to bring long pointy sticks into battle and use them in formations. 

Even crude formations in c-rpg will combat archer spam and cav spam.  But people refuse to even consider that as a possible solution to their woes.  So keep bitching and complaining, the dev's will cave and nerf something like they always do when enough people bitch about it.  When really they just need to say "have you tried tactics, teamwork, or not exposing your weaknesses to the enemy?  how bout you give that a try and then come back to me never"

[bilwit]

rename cRPG to Lance & Bow plz

[Joker86]

Wait. Telling infantry to take a shield is not okay, but several threads about Archers who only have a 0slot weapon with them are okay? Is it okay to tell Archers to fight in melee, and not kite, while it is not okay to tell infantry to get a shield against ranged, and a spear against cav? Tell the cav not to couche lance, but dont tell the infantry to get a spear. Tell the archers to go into melee whenever an infantry wants them to, but dont tell infantry to defend themselves by taking a shield? If you are getting shot, you use a shield. be clever, think yourself.
Anyone who doesn't help himself, is simply not in the position to complain. That's stupid.
There are only a few infantry players who actually use a shield (talking mainly about 2h here), example is rufio. He put 3 (?) points into shield. It is okay if he complains about Archers. But someone who doesn't use a shield, shouldn't do that.

You compare equipment to behaviour. By the way, I am not one of those who demand a nerf for archers but buffing their melee capabilities. If I reach an archer with my infantry I expect the archer to die, that would be balanced, because I can die on the way to the archer. That's what I estimate as fair. Sometimes I reach the archer and I win, sometimes he kills me on the way and he wins.

Equipment (spears, shields) means upkeep, weight and sometimes even skill points. Behaviour (couching, running) is completely independant of this. So your comparison doesn't really work.

And again, you can't simply say: "No shield loses against archers, shield wins against archers", because the chances of success matter as well. And if you are dead by 90% without shield, but win against archers with shield by 40%, you can't really say it's balanced. That's why all those "adapt"-replies are worthless, unless it's objectively proven that chances are always fair. Balancing is complicated, and you have to take a lot of things into account. A superficial glance at the matter will not be enough.

And this stupid claim that warband is mostly about melee (or that crpg is mostly about melee), is also stupid and not true. It doesn't even matter that the new forum url is "meleegaming". That doesnt change shit.

The Americans never were on the moon, it's simply not true and everyone who believes it is stupid.

...

You see how worthless such a statement is without reasoning?

- A lot of other games (e.g. Age of Chivalry, Skyrim, even the ancient Morrowind) have archer mechanics like M&B. How many games have melee mechanics like M&B?
- How many features (chambering, stuns, crushthrough, kicks, glances, staggers, knockdown...) were implemented in melee, how many features (arrow drop, missile speed, crosshear spread) were put into ranged combat?

What are your arguments?


_______________________________________

Another suggestion:

How about buffing infantry this way? On the cRPG character page, you get the "infantry training" option. Once clicked your character will become a pure (!) infantryman, and will remain that way until he is respecced or retired.

The effects are the following:

1.: Certain skills/WPFs become locked or capped at a certain, very low maximum (eventually spent skill points get refunded):

- Power Draw
- Power Throw
- Riding Skill
- Horse Archery
- Throwing WPF
- Archery WPF
- Crossbow WPF

2.: Certain skills are lowered in their attribute requirement from 3/1 to 2/1. Old skill point caps still remain the same:

- Power Strike
- Athletics
- Shield Skill
- Iron Flesh

Equipment weight is reduced by 50% or something like that.


Effect: Infantry becomes really terrifying. Archers and dismounted cav can't compare. But something should be done about unbreakable shields with shield skill 13, as with this change you could have an unbreakable shield and still hit rather hard.

Too extreme or not?

[rAve]

This may surprise some people, but all the same things that are getting you killed in game, are the same things that middle age armies had to counter and deal with.  When archers started getting the best of infantry, battle field commanders came up with the bright idea to use shield formations.  When cavalry started getting the best of ground troops, battlefield commanders came up with the bright idea to bring long pointy sticks into battle and use them in formations. 

Even crude formations in c-rpg will combat archer spam and cav spam.  But people refuse to even consider that as a possible solution to their woes.  So keep bitching and complaining, the dev's will cave and nerf something like they always do when enough people bitch about it.  When really they just need to say "have you tried tactics, teamwork, or not exposing your weaknesses to the enemy?  how bout you give that a try and then come back to me never"

you're always going around the forum talking about tactics...
you're right, that would solve everyone's problems, but thing is, you need hierarchy to command people, and then you need every to listen, it's hard enough in a shooter game on 5v5 games for the caller to call tactics, let alone a 50 vs 50 game...

[Miwiw]

No, a shield doesn't and shouldn't give you a 100% win. Why do you want the easy way? You wan't that the archer dies once you reach him? How easy is that? 

People should stop playing in easymode. Play a singleplayer game if you want to win in every case and single situation. Not every class should win easily against another one, especially not 2handed or polearms (rather pole but not 2h). 2h players chose the way of the "hero"; deal great damage, get great damage. It is impossible to do both, deal a lot of dmg and survive at the same time. That's simply not fair.
Most 2h think like that: "ehhh, I 1hit that Archer... I swing my big sword at him and he has to die!!!111" and then "ehhh, how did that fcking Archer kill meh? Thats not fairrrrrr! No one can kill meeeeeeeeeh!!"

Post wasn't only for you Joker.